HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit 17 - Cultural Resources Report CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT COVER SHEET
DAHP Project Number:
Author:Kelly R. Bush and Ashley A. Yates
Title of Report: Archaeological Survey Report: 8014, 8118, 8210, and 8326 172nd Street
Northeast, Arlington, Snohomish County, Washington
Date of Report: July 26, 2024
County: Snohomish Section: 25 and 26 Township: 31 N Range: 05 E
Quad: Arlington East Acres: —32.8
PDF of report submitted (REQUIRED) ® Yes
Historic Property Inventory Forms to be Approved Online? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Archaeological Site(s)/Isolate(s) Found or Amended? ❑ Yes ❑ No
TCP(s) found? F- Yes ® No
Replace a draft? ❑ Yes ® No
Satisfy a DAHP Archaeological Excavation Permit requirement? ❑ Yes # ® No
Were Human Remains Found? ❑ Yes DAHP Case # ® No
DAHP Archaeological Site #:
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT: 8014, 8118, 8210, AND 8326
172ND STREET NORTHEAST, ARLINGTON, SNOHOMISH COUNTY,
WASHINGTON
Prepared for: MJS Investors
r 1
ar '
/j
'4 f
July 26, 2024
Prepared by:
ERCI
1229 Cleveland Avenue,Mount Vernon,Washington 98273•Tel 360-826-4930•Fax 360-8264830•www.equinoxerci.com
CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR................................................................................Kelly R. Bush,MA
REPORT AUTHORS...............................................................Kelly R. Bush and Ashley A.Yates,BA
GRAPHICS....................................................................................................................Ashley A.Yates
FIELD RESEARCHERS ..............................................Grace A.Berlin,BA, Isabella R. Conover,BA,
...........................................................................Fiona L. Koehnen-Hots, BA,Rachel E. Pinkman,MA,
..............................................................................................Isabella L. Pipp,MA, and Ashley A.Yates
PROJECT CONTACT...............................................................................Rob Risinger,MJS Investors
TRIBAL CONTACTS ............................Steven Moses and Adam Osbekoff, Snoqualmie Indian Tribe
............................................................................................Kerry Lyste, Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians
.......................................................................................Richard Young and Gene Enick, Tulalip Tribes
DAHP CONTACTS............................................Stephanie Jolivette,Local Government Archaeologist
...........................................................................................................Rob Whitlam, State Archaeologist
.................................................................................................Guy Tasa, State Physical Anthropologist
Equinox Research and Consulting International Inc. (ERCI) would like to thank MJS Investors for
retaining us for this investigation and for their commitment to the process and archaeological resources.
We extend our thanks to the representatives of the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe, Stillaguamish Tribe of
Indians, and Tulalip Tribes for their insights and timely attention to our projects.
The opinions and recommendations in this report are those of ERCI alone and do not necessarily reflect
those held by any of the organizations or individuals mentioned above. Any errors or omissions are
ERCI's responsibility.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington ii
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
County Snohomish
TRS Township 31 N,Range 05 E, Section 25 and 26
Quad Arlington East
Area —32.8 acres
Lat/Long 480 9' 1"N/ 1220 7' 14"W
UTM Zone 10 U 565405 Easting 5333355 Northing
Elevation 333-435'
Nearest Water Body Tex Lake
Nearest Arch Site 45SN893——0.5 mile
Soils Tokul gravelly medial loam
Geology Glacial till
Agency/Project No.
Parcel ID 31052600100200
Address 8014 172nd St NE Arlington,WA 98223
Structure Build Year 1997
Property Owner Basim Virl and Diana M.
Property Owner Address 8014 172nd St NE,Arlington,WA 98223
Parcel ID 31052600102300, 31052600102200
Address 8118 172nd St NE Arlington,WA 98223
Structure Build Year 1993
Property Owner John J. and Kelly J.Markezinis
Property Owner Address 8118 172nd St NE,Arlington,WA 98223
Parcel ID 31052600100100
Address 8210 172nd St NE Arlington,WA 98223
Structure Build Year 1914
Property Owner Joe Stephen and Patricia Anne Matthias
Property Owner Address 13016 175th Dr SE, Snohomish,WA 98290
Parcel ID 31052500200600
Address 8326 172nd St NE Arlington,WA 98223
Structure Build Year 1997
Property Owner Lindsay Investments LLC
Property Owner Address 242 Burke Dr, Camano Island,WA 98282
In June 2024 Rob Risinger of MJS Investors contacted Kelly R. Bush of Equinox Research and
Consulting International Inc. (ERCI) to carry out an archaeological survey for 8014, 8118, 8210, and
8326 172nd Street Northeast(the Project)on approximately 32.8 acres,Arlington, Snohomish County,
Washington (Section 25 and 36, Township 31 N, Range 05 E) (Figure 1—Figure 5). The properties
involved are:
• 8014 172nd St NE(Snohomish County Assessor's Parcel 31052600100200)
• 8118 172nd St NE(Snohomish County Assessor's Parcels 31052600102300 and
31052600102200)
• 8210 172nd St NE(Snohomish County Assessor's Parcel 31052600100100)
• 8326 172nd St NE(Snohomish County Assessor's Parcel 31052500200600)
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington iii
The Project is privately funded at present, and although the City of Arlington has not required an
archaeological survey, permitting will be required. MJS Investors has requested this survey as part of
feasibility planning, in anticipation of compliance requirements. Project plans are not complete, and
the anticipated depth of disturbance is not yet known.
Following background research, on June 27 and 28, and July 17, 2024, ERCI undertook a pedestrian
and subsurface survey program(58 subsurface shovel probes)to look for material traces of past human
activity.
No Protected Cultural Resources were identified during the archaeological survey within the Project
area.
The management recommendations that we are now providing are based on this survey.We recommend
that:
1. As the Project is still in the planning phase, we do not know the depth of ground
disturbance.An archaeologist should review the plans to see if our survey provided enough
coverage for the actual ground disturbance proposed.
2. If Project plans include removing the house older than 50 years on parcel 3 1052600100 100,
a historic property inventory may be required; this should be confirmed with the lead
agency when there is one.
3. The proposed Project proceed as planned, following an unanticipated discovery protocol
(UDP)training given to all construction personnel by a professional archaeologist.A copy
of the Unanticipated Discoveries Protocol(UDP)to be kept on site at all times.
4. In the event that any ground-disturbing activities or other Project activities related to this
development or in any future development uncover protected archaeological objects or
sediments (e.g., old bottles or cans, charcoal, bones, shell, stone, horn or antler tools or
weapons), all work in the immediate vicinity should stop, the area should be secured, and
any equipment moved to a safe distance away from the location.The on-site superintendent
should then follow the steps specified in the UDP.
5. In the event that any ground-disturbing activities or other Project activities related to this
development or in any future development uncover human remains, all work in the
immediate vicinity should stop,the area should be secured,and any equipment moved to a
safe distance away from the location. The on-site superintendent should then follow the
steps specified in the UDP.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington iv
CONTENTS
CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...........................................................................................ii
MANAGEMENTSUMMARY.............................................................................................................iii
CONTENTS...........................................................................................................................................v
FIGURES..............................................................................................................................................vi
TABLES...............................................................................................................................................vii
1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK....................................................................................................4
3.0 TRIBAL CONSULTATION............................................................................................................4
4.0 BACKGROUND..............................................................................................................................4
4.1 Physical Environment................................................................................................................4
Geologyand Soils...........................................................................................................................5
Climateand Biota...........................................................................................................................9
4.2 Cultural Environment................................................................................................................9
Archaeologicalcultures................................................................................................................ 10
Salish Ethnography and Ethnohistory.......................................................................................... 1 1
Exploration and Immigration.......................................................................................................17
4.3 Previous Archaeology..............................................................................................................23
Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites...................................................................................24
Previous Cultural Resource Reports.............................................................................................24
National Register of Historic Places Properties ...........................................................................25
Previous Cemetery Reports..........................................................................................................25
State Heritage Barn Register........................................................................................................25
Archaeological Expectations........................................................................................................26
5.0 METHODS.....................................................................................................................................26
5.1 Archival Research....................................................................................................................26
5.2 Fieldwork.................................................................................................................................26
6.0 RESULTS.......................................................................................................................................27
6.1 Pedestrian Survey....................................................................................................................28
8014 172nd St NE(Parcel 31052600100200)..............................................................................31
8118 172nd St NE,First Parcel (Parcel 31052600102300)..........................................................33
8118 172nd St NE, Second Parcel(Parcel 31052600102200).....................................................37
8210 172nd St NE(Parcel 3 1052600 100 100)..............................................................................39
8326 172nd St NE(Parcel 31052500200600)..............................................................................44
6.2 Subsurface Survey...................................................................................................................49
6.3 Discussion................................................................................................................................55
7.0 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................................................55
8.0 REFERENCES CITED..................................................................................................................57
9.0 APPENDICES................................................................................................................................70
Appendix 1: Shovel Probe Descriptions,Particle Size Classes and Matrix Descriptions.............70
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington v
Appendix2: Photograph Log.........................................................................................................76
Appendix 3: Unanticipated Discovery Protocol............................................................................86
FIGURES
Figure 1: Regional map showing approximate Project location.............................................................I
Figure 2: USGS Arlington East and Arlington West 7.5-minute quadrangle with Project area outlined
inred............................................................................................................................................2
Figure 3: Snohomish County Assessor's map showing Project area outlined in red.............................2
Figure 4: Lidar map with Project area outlined in red............................................................................3
Figure 5: Aerial photograph with Project area outlined in red...............................................................3
Figure 6: Map of surface geology with the Project area outlined in red(after Minard 1985)................7
Figure 7: Map of soils with Project area outlined in orange(after Soil Survey Staff 2023a). ...............8
Figure 8: Example of a seasonal house, "Mat House—Skokomish" (1912) by Edward S. Curtis
(Northwestern University Library 2003a)..................................................................................13
Figure 9: Examples of the kind of baskets made by Coast Salish people,"Puget Sound Baskets"(1912)
by Edward S. Curtis(Northwestern University Library 2003b)................................................16
Figure 10: Example of the kind of weaving done by Salish people, "Goat-hair Blanket—Cowichan"
(1912)by Edward S. Curtis (Northwestern University Library 2003c).....................................17
Figure 11: General Land Office map from 1875 showing early land ownership in Project vicinity. ..21
Figure 12: Sketch map showing labeled parcels. .................................................................................28
Figure 13: Sketch map showing pedestrian survey route.....................................................................29
Figure 14: Sketch map showing points of interest from pedestrian survey..........................................30
Figure 15: View west, front of house and yard. ...................................................................................31
Figure 16: View south,barn and driveway...........................................................................................32
Figure 17: View northeast,looking towards house from the base of steepest slope............................32
Figure 18: View northeast of field at base of slope..............................................................................33
Figure 19: View west,house and garage..............................................................................................34
Figure 20: View southeast,agricultural field. ......................................................................................34
Figure 21: View south,backyard..........................................................................................................35
Figure 22: View north,driveway..........................................................................................................35
Figure 23: View south, looking down ditch from northern end...........................................................36
Figure 24: View south southeast,modern firepit. ................................................................................36
Figure 25: View northeast,overview of parcel 31052600102300 from the southwest corner.............37
Figure 26: View west, overgrown ditch at edge of field......................................................................38
Figure 27: View west,recently burnt area on parcel 31052600102200...............................................38
Figure 28: View north,driveway..........................................................................................................39
Figure 29: View southeast,garage and driveway.................................................................................40
Figure 30: View southeast,parcel overview. .......................................................................................40
Figure 31: View west, front porch of house.........................................................................................41
Figure 32: View south, front of house..................................................................................................41
Figure 33: View north, side porch of the house. ..................................................................................42
Figure 34: View northeast,back side of house,roof caved in..............................................................42
Figure35: View east,carport...............................................................................................................43
Figure 36: View north,carport with chimney indicated in red.............................................................43
Figure 37: View southeast,residential area of parcel...........................................................................44
Figure 38: View southwest,residential area of parcel..........................................................................45
Figure 39: View east,ERCI in treed area.............................................................................................45
Figure 40: View south, standing water in treed area............................................................................46
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington vi
Figure 41: Plan view, colorless glass Gatorade bottle..........................................................................46
Figure 42: View west, old-growth notched stump. ..............................................................................47
Figure 43: View west, old-growth notched stump. ..............................................................................47
Figure 44: View east, foundation. ........................................................................................................48
Figure 45: View north, foundation.......................................................................................................48
Figure 46: Sketch map showing negative SP locations and those that were augered. .........................50
Figure 47: View northwest, SP 15 overview with ERCI at SP 8 in background. ................................51
Figure 48: View north northeast, SP 51 overview................................................................................51
Figure 49: View northeast, SP 39 overview.........................................................................................52
Figure 50: View south, SP 30 profile of M1 overlying M2. ................................................................52
Figure 51: View south, SP 9 profile of M1 over M2............................................................................53
Figure 52: Plan view, SP 36 refuse from Ml.......................................................................................53
Figure 53: View south, SP 21 overview with foundation, SP marked with shovel..............................54
Figure 54: Plan view,wire nails from M1 of SP 21.............................................................................54
Figure 55: Example of railroad ties for UDP. ......................................................................................87
Figure 56: Example of historic foundation for UDP............................................................................87
Figure 57: Example of historic glass artifacts for UDP........................................................................88
Figure 58: Example of historic solder dot can for UDP.......................................................................88
Figure 59: Example of protected rock-lined hearth feature for UDP...................................................89
Figure 60: Example of projectile point for UDP..................................................................................89
Figure 61: Example of protected adze blade for UDP..........................................................................90
Figure 62: Example of stone tool for UDP...........................................................................................90
Figure 63: Example of stone tool for UDP...........................................................................................91
Figure 64: Example of bone awl for UDP............................................................................................91
Figure 65: Example of worked bone and spines for UDP....................................................................92
Figure 66: Example of cedar bark basketry for UDP...........................................................................92
Figure 67: Example of planked tree for UDP.......................................................................................93
TABLES
Table 1: Previously recorded archaeological sites within one mile of the Project area.......................24
Table 2: Previous cultural resource reports on file with DAHP...........................................................24
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington vii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In June 2024 Rob Risinger of MJS Investors contacted Kelly R. Bush of Equinox Research and
Consulting International Inc. (ERCI) to carry out an archaeological survey for 8014, 8118, 8210, and
8326 172nd Street Northeast(the Project)on approximately 32.8 acres,Arlington, Snohomish County,
Washington (Section 25 and 36, Township 31 N, Range 05 E) (Figure 1—Figure 5). The properties
involved are:
• 8014 172nd St NE(Snohomish County Assessor's Parcel 31052600100200)
• 8118 172nd St NE(Snohomish County Assessor's Parcels 31052600102300 and
31052600102200)
• 8210 172nd St NE(Snohomish County Assessor's Parcel 31052600100100)
• 8326 172nd St NE(Snohomish County Assessor's Parcel 31052500200600)
The Project is privately funded at present, and although the City of Arlington has not required an
archaeological survey,permitting will be required. So MJS Investors has requested this survey as part
of feasibility planning,in anticipation of compliance requirements. Project plans are not complete,and
the anticipated depth of disturbance is not yet known.
This report documents ERCI's background research and archaeological survey for the Project.
Vancouver No -kkRRrv'e, e ReY4 US-Canada Border
Island co Bellin'h\,-i Lahr
Lake
SkaU,l F`jyP1 Concrete
3t.Vernon
Oak Harbor m °
Sullagram'sh Rivar Ro
t osevelt
Project c
• Lake
�� � I t Chelan �•
Everett
>� `� sn6r nisn ripe
aJ`�ve f Seattle r Spokane
r C:�ar Rrver, 1 ro /Wenatchee
f
4 Veen Rrve. Moses Lake
ryreha�s r � Ellensburg M."',Olympia • Lake
J
�• ^"'^^'WWW___ .Pullman
Richland.l
e Vancouver
Figure 1: Regional map showing approximate Project location.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 1
LIBM
130
P r • �•23 %
Jill 4 n 22
Awn
19
Edgecom� M�ONwo
... .` _Ys _%GREEN — SCO. �1• .
27
e I 3V.
• - ti .
i
Project Area N I 1
0 1,000 2,000 �- 1 - \J _ �•
210011�Feet
Meters
0 400 800
Figure 2: USGS Arlington East and Arlington West 7.5-minute quadrangle with Project area outlined
in red.
14
J
l 11 1 1 III j
i
4772nd St NC
J o -- — _
O O
31052600100200 N o
-- o
CD
CD
O N
OLn
N O
CD M
CD
M O
O
O ul
O N
_ N Lr)
N O
O M
,y M
r
N
_O
M
ein
Brae_—-v� ------- _
- --------------
----------
-- -
---------—
Project Area
0 150 300
Feet
Meters -
0 60 120
Figure 3: Snohomish County Assessor's map showing Project area outlined in red.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 2
S Cf
_ f
i .
0 Project Area
0 500 1,000
11 Feet
Meters '
0 150 300
Data Provided by:Puget Sound Lidar Consortium
Figure 4: Lidar map with Project area outlined in red.
� � .�- �` �.�+ , *. •�_'::�Wit's���
Lie
Floor t ''
AL
0 Project Area �:. • . }
• :� �, ' L
_ ..� ♦. Feet ' !a•
Meters
350
Figure 5: Aerial photograph with Project area outlined in red.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 3
2.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
At the time of this report,the Project is entirely privately funded,and no permitting or funding agency
has required a cultural resources survey. However, it is anticipated that the Project may fall under
SEPA,which requires that all major actions sponsored,funded,permitted,or approved by state or local
agencies undergo planning to ensure environmental considerations such as impacts on historic and
cultural resources are given due weight in decision-making. State implementing regulations are in
Washington Administrative Code(WAC)Title 197 Chapter 197-11 Section 400, in which the purpose
of an environmental impact statement is outlined.
Moreover, in Washington State archaeological sites are protected by several state laws, including the
Revised Code of Washington(RCW)27.53—Archaeological Sites and Resources, and RCW 27.44—
Indian Graves and Records.These laws require that consideration be given to archaeological resources
during construction and development activities. RCW 27.44 also strictly mandates the protection of
human skeletal remains and imposes a duty to notify law enforcement in the case of inadvertent
discovery.
ERCI will ensure that the report is distributed to the Tribes.
3.0 TRIBAL CONSULTATION
The Snoqualmie Indian Tribe, Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians, and Tulalip Tribes consider the Project
area within their traditional use area. The Tribes will require detailed development descriptions to
adequately review the Project.When the Project acquires a lead permitting or funding agency,they will
be responsible for carrying out consultation regarding this Project,including providing our report to the
affected Tribes.Tribal representatives are the only people qualified to determine if Traditional Cultural
Properties exist within the Project area,whether they will be affected by the undertaking,and how any
suggested management strategies might work. In discussions between Kelly Bush and Tribal
representatives,it is clear that the Tribes consider this area to be culturally and historically significant,
and are concerned about the effects of development.
4.0 BACKGROUND
Any archaeological undertaking requires knowledge of the physical surroundings(and their evolution)
and the duration and kind of human activity in any given area.From this knowledge,archaeologists are
able to develop the current best method to carry out field investigations. For example, environmental
factors play an important role in the location and preservation of archaeological sites. Sediments and
soils are of particular interest to cultural resource managers because they can be used for reconstructing
past landscapes and landscape evolution, in estimating the age of surfaces and depositional episodes,
and providing physical and chemical indicators of human occupation(Holliday 1992).
4.1 Physical Environment
The Project area lies in a mixed residential and commercial area west of State Route 9.The Project area
is bounded by 172nd Steet Northeast to the north,and private property to the west,east,and south.Part
of 79th Avenue Northeast is inside the Project area.The Project area lies on a hilly relict glacial plateau
to the east of Arlington. Elevation in the Project area ranges from 333 to 435 feet above sea level.
Portage Creek is less than a mile from the Project area to the east. An unnamed seasonal stream drains
the Project area;when it reaches the Arlington and Marysville flats it is artificially channelized.
Previous disturbance to the Project area includes
• Logging and associated infrastructure
• Construction and maintenance of driveways
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 4
Clearing, construction,and maintenance of buildings and infrastructure
Construction and maintenance of 79th Avenue Northeast.
Geology and Soils
The geology of a region is important to archaeological investigations because it lays the foundation for
landforms and soil development. Like the foundation of a house, it determines the shape and
subsequently the human use of the landscape above it.How water and sediment move across the surface
of the earth is in a great part determined by geology. Geology,in turn, affects how people use the land.
Slope, available water, and the success of vegetation are influenced by what is under the soil.
Archaeologists use the geology of the Project area and the surrounding landscape to help assess both
the likelihood of encountering archaeological objects and features, and the likelihood that natural
deposition could have created an archaeological site in the absence of human agency.
Geomorphology of the Puget Lowland
For most of the last 2.6 million years—the Pleistocene Epoch—the Earth underwent drastic shifts in
global temperature caused by periodic variations in the Earth's orbital eccentricity, axial tilt and
precession.The result has been 11 ice ages,during which almost 30 percent of the world's land surface
was covered by sheets of ice as much as 3 kilometers (km)thick(Porter and Swanson 1998).
As the last cold stage intensified,high-altitude valley glaciers grew in depth and extent, and through a
process of coalescence formed the Cordilleran Ice Sheet, centered over the Pacific Northwest's
Mountain ranges: Coast Mountains, Cascade Range, Olympic Mountains, Columbia Mountains and
Rocky Mountains. Further east in North America, ice simply accumulated in place, creating the
Laurentide ice sheet, centered over Hudson Bay. During the cold periods (glacials or glaciations) so
much of the world's water was stored as ice that global sea level dropped by as much as 150 meters
(m) (almost 500 feet). At the same time,beneath the ice,Earth's crust was depressed by the enormous
weight. Thus, during the last glaciation,much of what is now the coastline was below present-day sea
level. The most recent glacial period—the Fraser Glaciation—began about 25,000 years ago and ended
by about 10,000. In that time the ice advanced and retreated twice in what is now the area of Puget
Sound,first during the Everson Creek Stade and most recently in the Vashon Stade(Easterbrook 1986).
At the height of the Vashon Stade—about 17,500 years ago—the Project area was under as much as 2
km of glacial ice (Porter and Swanson 1998:206). By about 16,500 years ago the ice was retreating—
exposing the Puget Lowland and Cascade Range—and glacial meltwater carried rivers of sediment
onto the lowlands, mantling the area with deep deposits that subsequent stream activity covered with
alluvium in river valleys and built out deltas in Puget Sound.
As the ice sheets finally retreated the land rebounded and sea level rose. The precise timing of sea-level
stabilization(eustacy) and the rate of post-glacial rebound(isostasy)varied from place to place due to
a complex interplay between the underlying geology and the surficial geological processes that
predominated at any given location. In the Pacific Northwest, most of the coastline has been within a
few meters of present-day sea level for about the last 6,000 years (Anundsen et al. 1994),while in the
northernmost parts of the Northern Hemisphere the land is still rebounding(Thorson 1980, 1989).Yet,
in the Hakai Passage region of the central British Columbia coast,due to the particulars of geology and
movement of the receding ice sheet, sea level has been relatively stable for most of the past 15,000
years(McLaren et al. 2014),which has implications for early human migration.
On the Salish Sea the picture is equally complex. Due to the gradual south-to-north progression of
deglaciation and the relatively rapid rise of sea level in the early postglacial period, sea level in the
southern Puget Sound was about 40 m below its present elevation by 8,000 years ago(Thorson 1989).
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 5
By contrast, in the northern Puget Sound at the same time, sea level was only about 10 m below its
present elevation(Clague 1983; Easterbrook 1963;Kelsey et al. 2004; Thorson 1989).
Across the globe,sea level has been rising gradually since about 8,000 years ago.By about 5,000 years
ago, sea level across Puget Sound was about 2 to 3 m below its present level; it reached its present-day
elevation only in the last 1,500 years or so (Kelsey et al. 2004; Sherrod et al. 2000). For all these
reasons, even though people have been in the region for 14,000 or more years, evidence for human
occupation near the present Puget Sound coastline dates to the time since sea level stabilized at or near
its present elevation. In general, evidence of earlier coastal occupation has been inundated by the
encroaching sea.
Surface Geology
Surface sediment in the Project area is Pleistocene Fraser Glaciation Vashon Stade till (Qvt in Figure
6),"deposited beneath the younger recessional outwash and ablation", and described as:
[Qvt] Referred to locally as Vashon till, consists of a non-sorted mixture of clay-silt,
sand,pebbles,cobbles,and boulders(diamicton),but includes some lenses of stratified
material, particularly near the base of the deposit. The deposit is generally a compact
lodgment till and often referred to as hardpan [Minard 1985].
Soils
Geologists define a soil as the effect of weathering on naturally or culturally deposited sediments,which
creates discernible `horizons'within a vertical soil profile.A soil typically comprises an A horizon that
contains decomposed organic material mixed with the upper portion of the so-called parent material—
usually naturally occurring deposits that are exposed to weathering. The A horizon lies above one or
more horizons that develop as a result of water percolating downward,carrying chemicals leached from
the A and lower horizons. Soils vary from place to place across the landscape,in keeping with the type
of sediments that form the parent material and the local environmental conditions. The horizons of
different soil types display color variations according to the local soil chemistry. Color, coupled with
the nature of the parent material are what enable soil scientists and archaeologists to distinguish one
soil type from another, and, most importantly, to tell a naturally developed soil from a stratigraphic
profile that results from cultural processes. A soil complex consists of areas of two or more soils, so
intricately mixed or so small in size that they cannot be shown separately on the soil map.Each area of
a complex contains some of each of the two or more dominant soils, and the pattern and relative
proportions are about the same in all areas.
There is one soil type within the Project area: Tokul gravelly medial loam,from 0-8 percent slopes(72
in Figure 7)(Soil Survey Staff 2023a,2023b).
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 6
1 �• \ e
•� � Z
$334 23
Y 1 Y
a
Js REENW O ry
"33 �! • �+u
20000 •• 26 25 3��
FEET •� `
ti
QVt
IN
1
SCALE 1:24 00d
1 0 1 MILE
•� 1000 O 1000 2000 7000 4000 sm 6000 7000 FEET
QZT
1 S 0 1 KILOMETER
CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET
NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929
Figure 6: Map of surface geology with the Project area outlined in red(after Minard 1985).
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 7
MR% Jill 111111111 Jill
ANA
JJ1 �
1
�I
'00 ft
Figure 7: Map of soils with Project area outlined in orange (after Soil Survey Staff 2023a).
Tokul gravelly medial loam, from 0-8 percent slopes is distributed on hillslopes and till plains, and
the parent material is volcanic ash mixed with loess over glacial till.It is moderately well drained,with
a depth to the water table of about 18 to 36 inches.The surface does not pond or flood.A typical profile
includes: 0 to 1 inches, slightly decomposed plant material; 1 to 2 inches, highly decomposed plant
material; 2 to 6 inches, gravelly medial loam; 6 to 9 inches, gravelly medial loam; 9 to 17 inches,
gravelly medial loam; 17 to 24 inches, gravelly medial loam; 24 to 33 inches, gravelly medial fine
sandy loam; 33 to 62 inches, cemented material(Soil Survey Staff 2023b).
0 to 3 cm; forest litter consisting of leaves and twigs.
3 to 5 cm; black(IOYR 2/1) decomposed litter.
5 to 15 cm;gravelly medial loam,yellowish brown(1 OYR 5/4)dry,dark brown(7.5YR
3/2)moist; moderate medium granular structure; soft,very friable, slightly sticky and
nonplastic,weakly smeary;common very fine,fine,and medium and few coarse roots;
common very fine discontinuous pores; 5 percent medium rounded concretions; 15
percent gravel; moderately acid(pH 5.8); abrupt wavy boundary
15 to 23 cm; gravelly medial loam, light brown (7.5YR 6/4) dry, brown (7.5YR 4/4)
moist; weak medium subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, very friable, slightly
sticky and slightly plastic, weakly smeary; common very fine, fine, and medium and
few coarse roots; common very fine discontinuous pores; 5 percent fine and medium
rounded concretions; 15 percent gravel; slightly acid(pH 6.2); clear smooth boundary
23 to 43 cm; gravelly medial loam, light yellowish brown (IOYR 6/4) dry, strong
brown (7.5YR 5/6) moist; weak medium subangular blocky structure; slightly hard,
very friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic, weakly smeary; common very fine,
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 8
fine, and medium and few coarse roots; common very fine discontinuous pores; 5
percent fine and medium rounded concretions; 15 percent gravel; slightly acid (pH
6.2); clear smooth boundary
43 to 61 cm; gravelly medial loam, very pale brown(10YR 7/4) dry, dark yellowish
brown (10YR 4/4) moist; common medium distinct yellowish brown (10YR 5/8)
redoximorphic concentrations; weak medium subangular blocky structure; slightly
hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic, weakly smeary; few very fine, fine,
medium, and coarse roots; common very fine discontinuous pores; 3 percent fine
rounded concretions; 20 percent gravel and 10 percent cobbles; slightly acid(pH 6.2);
abrupt smooth boundary
61 to 84 cm; gravelly medial fine sandy loam, pale yellow (2.5Y 8/4) dry, light olive
brown (2.5Y 5/4) moist; common fine distinct yellowish brown (10YR 5/8)
redoximorphic concentrations; massive; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and
nonplastic; weakly smeary; few very fine, fine, medium, and coarse roots; common
very fine discontinuous pores; 1 percent fine irregularly shaped concretions;25 percent
gravel and 5 percent cobbles; moderately acid(pH 6.0); abrupt smooth boundary
84 to 157 cm;very gravelly sandy loam,light gray(2.5Y 7/2)dry,dark grayish brown
(2.5Y 4/2) moist; common medium distinct yellowish brown (10YR 5/8)
redoximorphic concentrations; massive; hard, extremely firm, weakly cemented,
extremely hard in places; 35 percent gravel; very thin (0.55 mm) discontinuous
indurated layer on surface of horizon;moderately acid(pH 6.0) [National Cooperative
Soil Survey 20171.
Climate and Biota
Warm, dry summers and mild, wet winters prevail in this biogeoclimatic zone. Before the influx of
immigrant settlers, the Project area and surroundings likely supported prairies and the Tsuga
heterophylla (western hemlock) Zone (Franklin and Dyrness 1988),which includes western red cedar
(Thuja plicata)(see also Heusser 1983; Pojar and Mackinnon 1994;Turner 1995).
Hebda and Mathewes(1984)state that Thuja plicata occurred in low frequencies throughout the region
between 10,000 and 6,000 years before present (BP). Both cedar and hemlock began to expand
following 6800 BP and likely dominated the Puget Lowland by 5000 BP. Cooling temperatures and
increased rainfall also resulted in the increase of deltaic wetland and riparian habitat (Hebda 2000;
Hutchings and Campbell 2005).
The area likely supported a wide variety of large and small mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians
common to river deltas and foothill transition zones.Bear,cougar,deer and elk are the indigenous large
mammals,with small mammals including otter,beaver,fox,porcupine,marten,snowshoe hare,bobcat,
chipmunk and squirrel. In the nearby Portage Creek, high-value fish such as salmon and trout would
have been abundant resources. Prior to immigrants arriving in this area, land mammals and plant
resources would have been abundant during all seasons.
4.2 Cultural Environment
The Project area lies in a region that Native Americans had inhabited for at least 14,000 years by the
time of contact with Europeans, when Salishan-speaking people occupied vast tracts in the Columbia
and Fraser River basins, the inland waters of the Salish Sea, the Puget Lowland, the Cascade Range,
and parts of the Pacific Coast between the Columbia River and the Olympic Peninsula. European
explorers first entered the region in the late sixteenth century,with immigrant settlement beginning in
the early nineteenth century and increasing after the Donation Land Claim Act of 1850 and Homestead
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 9
Act of 1862.Here we present a synopsis of the archaeological cultures,traditional Salish lifeways, and
pertinent details of the time since immigrant occupation.
Archaeological cultures
Archaeological evidence of human presence in Western Washington is at least 14,000 years old in the
upland areas, evidenced by finds of Clovis and other early postglacial cultural traditions, though
evidence for earlier occupation on the Pacific Coast of Canada and in other areas of North America
date up to 23,000 years ago(Ames and Maschner 1999; Bennett et al. 2021; Kopperl 2016;Kopperl et
al. 2015; McLaren et al. 2018). Although people have been in the region all along, sea level rise in the
early and middle Holocene caused river valleys in the Puget Lowlands to gradually fill up with
sediment, burying any early archaeological sites in the near-stream areas. Thus, evidence for early
human occupation around Puget Sound is most often found at higher elevations on landforms that retain
sediments from those earlier times,and sometimes deeply buried in river valleys.In those upland areas,
where sea level change has had no effect on archaeological visibility,evidence from the early Holocene
is widespread, but well-dated contexts are extremely rare—most archaeological assemblages are
`dated' by their formal similarity to those recovered from dated contexts.
The earliest period in Western Washington is represented by the Lower Bear Creek Site (45KI839),
near the shore of Lake Sammamish. It is a late Pleistocene-Holocene (LPH) transition site with
diagnostic lithics of the western North American Paleoindian and Paleoarchaic traditions with two
archaeological deposits. Peat formation and deposition persisted from about 12,900 cal BP until about
7600 cal BP; Mazama tephra serves as a time marker, at 7580 to 8030 cal BP, for deposition in the
region.A more recent deposit lies above Mazama tephra and peat,accumulation of diatomaceous earth,
which persisted from about 7600 cal BP until 3900 cal BP. The second deposit is a deeper LPH
component below the peat. The deeper component rests on glacial sediments and is below peat and
diatomaceous earth(Kopperl 2016).
In the North Cascades National Park near Marblemount and Newhalem in the Skagit River basin, the
Cascade Pass site yielded artifacts and a cooking feature beneath Mazama volcanic ash, estimated to
be 9,700 years old. The site is nine layers of volcanic ash from four Cascade volcanoes that are
interbedded with archaeological deposits. Archaeological deposits include heating and cooking pits,
flaked stone, discarded tool fragments, and quartz quarrying debris. Charcoal, burnt seeds and burnt
wood also found at all deposit depths. The most recent deposit is dated 2200 and 2000 years old,
exhibiting a long history of utilization of the Cascade Pass (Mierendorf et al. 2018:99). The Beech
Creek Site (45LE415) in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest of southwestern Washington represents
another early Holocene archaeological culture,the Stemmed Point Tradition, at 9,200 years old(Mack
et al. 2010).
In the Puget Sound/Cascade regional cultural chronology, the Olcott Phase (ca. 10,000 to 7,550 years
ago) succeeds the Fluted Point and Stemmed traditions. Olcott assemblages are remarkably similar to
others attributed to the Old Cordilleran Tradition,well known from other parts of the Northwest Coast
(Chatters et al. 2011). Typical Olcott artifacts include "Cascade" leaf-shaped bifaces, which bear
distinctive edge grinding on the stem, or hafting portion, and often-heavily patinated expedient stone
artifacts of medium-to coarse-grained raw material,and lacking in fine-grained silicates.
Although there are numerous sites ascribed to the Olcott Phase,securely dated components are rare,as
evidenced by the few mentioned here. Thermoluminescence (TL) dating of fire-modified rock(FMR)
from the Woodhaven Site (45SN417), near Granite Falls, produced median dates of 9,316 and 7,886
years ago(Kiers 2014).Two other Olcott Phase sites near Granite Falls,45SN28 and 45SN303,yielded
TL dates on FMR in the same age range,between 7,340 and 9,650 years ago(Chatters et al. 2011).
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 10
Between about 7,550 and 4,000 years ago—often termed the middle Holocene—well-dated
archaeological sites are more numerous,in part due to the gradual stabilization of sea level near present
elevations.The archaeological cultures are called by many names,but the Marymoor Phase and Charles
Culture(or Mayne Phase in the San Juan/Gulf Islands)seem most common in the region.Many include
microblade technology. Recent radiocarbon dates from calcined bone at the Marymoor Site (45KI9)
range between approximately 5300 to 7000 BP (Chatters et al. 2017; Greengo and Houston 1970).
Other sites in the region dated to the middle Holocene include Cattle Point(45SJ9)on San Juan Island
(King 1950),the Glenrose Cannery Site(DgRr-22)near Vancouver,BC. (Matson 1976),the Milliken
Site (DjRi-3) near Yale, B.C. (Borden 1960), and Pender Island (DeRt-1 and -2) in the Gulf Islands,
the northern extension of the San Juan Islands(Carlson and Hobler 1993) and the more recent deposits
at the Cascade Pass Site(45CH221) (Mierendorf et al. 2018).
Beginning roughly 5,000 years ago western red cedar became more prevalent in the coastal forests,and
archaeological evidence reveals the intensification of its use by the people living on the Salish Sea.
Specifically,in the Locamo Beach Phase(3,300-3,500 to 2,500 years ago)and the succeeding Marpole
Phase,the woodworking triad of the antler wedge,polished nephrite adze bit and hand maul formed an
increasingly prominent part of coastal culture-rich shell deposits (Hebda and Mathewes 1984). In
addition, evidence for large post and plank houses and food storage comes to the fore (Matson 2010).
Artifact assemblages from this time also illustrate increasing social complexity in the form of personal
adormnent—e.g., finely made nephrite and jadeite labrets—refinements in procurement technology—
e.g.,ground slate knives,toggling harpoons and fishing paraphernalia—and ascribed status in the form
of status symbols interred with infants and very young children, and cranial deformation. These
archaeological manifestations comprise the climax Northwest Coast cultural pattern that was
encountered when Europeans first visited the region.Among the best known archaeological sites in the
region,the Ozette site(2,500 to 500 years ago)(e.g.,Daugherty and Fryxell 1967) and the Hoko River
site (3,000 to 1,700) (Croes 1995) on the Olympic Peninsula preserved botanical material in addition
to the other artifacts common in most Northwest Coast culture-rich shell deposits, thus revealing a
breadth of material culture similar to that known ethnographically, and underscoring the material and
social complexity of the regional cultures that existed in the late precontact period.
Finally, the complex interplay of post-glacial geological processes meant that salmon streams were
constantly disrupted by cycles of erosion and deposition, which precluded establishment of nearshore
marine resources and climax salmon runs between the time of deglaciation and that of sea-level
stabilization,which began around 5,000 years ago and ended approximately 1,500 years ago(Fladmark
1975). Thus, prior to about 5,000 years ago, without the abundant, predictable salmon runs, which
affect entire river systems and the people who exploit them, the entire region would have been
populated by more mobile foragers (Grier et al. 2009; Moss et al. 2007). Since that time, the rich
resources available in the maritime and riverine environments encouraged a less mobile lifestyle for
some people. We see larger residential villages, increasingly dense populations and complex cultures
that existed at the time of European contact(Butler and Campbell 2004; Taylor et al. 2011).
Specific archaeological findings for the Project area and surroundings are discussed in Section 4.3.
Salish Ethnography and Ethnohistory
The Project area has been home to people since time immemorial. Ethnographic accounts,the historic
record and the oral histories of the people who lived provide stories of the lives and deaths of the area's
original inhabitants. The published material for the overall Coast Salish tribal area is primarily written
by early and mid-twentieth century ethnographers and archaeologists educated in universities. These
ethnographies are precious, but they are one snapshot from one researcher based on interviews with
select informants. They are extremely filtered and limited. It is also easy to read these accounts and
think that the descendants of the informants too lived in the past, however modern-day tribal
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 11
communities are vibrant active neighbors and partners in cultural resource management and protection.
Their cultures are alive.It is within this context that we provide a brief summary of the published work
of these researchers with the understanding that they are limited in scope and content.
A detailed description of central Puget Sound cultures is beyond the scope of this report. Instead, we
present a broad overview of their traditional lifeways, including what is known of the precontact
cultures,using knowledge gained from ethnography,ethnohistory,and the historic record.For in-depth
descriptions of traditional Salish culture, readers are directed to the following references: Adamson
(1969),Allen(1976),Amoss(1977a, 1977b, 1978, 1981),Belcher(1986),Bierwert(1990, 1993, 1999),
Blukis Onat and Hollenbeck(1981), Boyd(1994, 1999), Bruseth(1926), Collins (1950, 1952, 1974a,
1974b [1946]), Curtis (1913), Dewhirst (1976), Eells and Castile (1985), Elmendorf(1971), Guilmet
et al. (1991), Gunther(1928, 1945), Haeberlin(1924), Haberlin and Gunther(1930), Harmon (1998),
Harris(1994),Howay(1918),Jorgensen(1969),Kew(1972, 1990),Mansfield(1993),B.Miller(1993,
1995, 1997, 1998,2001),Miller and Boxberger(1994),Mooney(1976),Moss(1986),M. Smith(1941,
1950, 1956), Snyder(1954, 1980, 1981), Spier(1935, 1936), Stewart(1973, 1977, 1979, 1984, 1996),
Suttles(1957, 1958, 1960, 1974 [19511, 1987, 1990a,b), Suttles and Lane(1990),Taylor(1953, 1984),
Tollefson(1989, 1992), Tollefson et al. (1996), Tweddell (1974 [1953]),United States (1859),United
States Court of Claims (1933),Waterman(1920), and Waterman et al. (2001).
Salish social life
The peoples of the greater Snohomish River and Stillaguamish River watersheds, like other groups
around Puget Sound,followed seasonal mobility patterns dictated by the time of year resources became
available, generally occupying a permanent village in the winter, and traveling throughout the rest of
the year to temporary camps at known fishing, hunting, and gathering locations. Territory boundaries
were flexible, often crossed by marriage, kin groups, and resource acquisition areas shared between
friendly tribes(Dover and Fitzpatrick 2015;Miss and Campbell 1991).Winter villages were permanent
habitation sites with some occupants residing there year-round. Two or more extended families lived
together in a winter house, and during the spring, summer, and fall when individual families left the
winter village for their temporary gathering and hunting camps,they would often join with relatives or
friends from other villages (Haeberlin and Gunther 1930). Resident families were generally related
through the father's line,though there were men who moved to live with their wife's family(Tweddell
1974). Marriages were exogamous, to expand the social and economic resources of the group and
strengthen ties with friendly tribes (Miss and Campbell 1991).
Longhouses in the winter villages were constructed of cedar planks over posts and beams. The planks
forming the walls were tied to the post,while roof planks were loose so they could be removed to allow
sunlight into the house during the day or to act as a chimney for cooking-fire smoke (Bruseth 1926;
Dover and Fitzpatrick 2015). Unlike other Puget Sound tribes who tied the wall planks vertically,the
Stillaguamish tied them horizontally; however, they did use the swinging entrance doors of the other
tribes. The interior poles were often carved(Haeberlin and Gunther 1930).Woven cattail mats covered
the floors and walls,and were used as bedding,while beds and storage shelves lined the walls.Baskets
were hung from hooks on the poles and dried fish was hung from the roof support pole.Each longhouse
was home to up to 30 people (Blukis Onat and Hollenbeck 1981). Winter houses were one to two
hundred feet long, often built on Puget Sound or rivers and streams facing the water.
Summer houses constructed for the gathering and hunting camps were often simpler and made of
materials that were easily transported. The Snoqualmie people made square mat-covered houses with
gable roofs (Haeberlin and Gunther 1930:18). Four poles with forked ends were at each corner, the
forked ends held up horizontal poles that made the roof. One side of the house was left open, unless
there was bad weather, and the roof and other sides were covered with mats (Haeberlin and Gunther
1930:18).A temporary house,called g."Elai'tx",made of cattail mats tied to wood poles,could be up to
ERCI-Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 12
30 feet long and usually housed one family,though if more than one family resided together the house
would be built larger to accommodate them(Haeberlin and Gunther 1930:19). Figure 8 is an example
of the summer square house style made by the Skokomish, a tribe in the south Puget Sound.
T
Figure 8: Example of a seasonal house, "Mat House—Skokomish" (1912) by Edward S. Curtis
(Northwestern University Library 2003a).
Each village had a potlatch house unless economic circumstances prevented a village from building
one. Potlatches were held at remarkable occasions, like when a young person received the name of an
ancestor, when the salmon runs began, when a death occurred, when a body was reburied, or after
successful hunts. There was a potlatch house at the village of hebd'lb near present-day Everett and one
at the largest village, tc'ir!d'gs,at Priest Point(Haeberlin and Gunther 1930).
The peoples of the greater Snohomish River watershed had friendly relations with the tribes east of the
Cascades, including the Chelan and Wenatchee, and would trade and intermarry with them. The
Snoqualmie Valley hosted one of the principal regional east—west trade routes across the Cascade
Mountains, which facilitated frequent interactions between the Salish Sea and Interior Salish groups
across the Cascade Divide. Trading parties from the east journeyed through this area on their way to
Puget Sound(Haeberlin and Gunther 1930:11; Teit 1928:110, 121). The Stillaguamish shared hunting
areas with the eastern tribes under the condition that they stayed within certain boundaries and did not
take too much game(Bruseth 1926).
Fish and Fishing
Fish are central to the culture of the central Puget Sound today and to their ancestors. Salmon was a
primary staple in the diet and were most bountiful in the fall and early winter when they traveled up
streams to spawn. Winter villages were often at or near important salmon fishing locations. Salmon
were caught in a variety of ways, including using weirs, nets, traps, lines, or spears, depending on the
number of fish and location within the river or stream. Smelt,herring, flounder, and trout were sought
after, and the peoples of the greater Snohomish River watershed fished for sturgeon, cod, and skates.
Smelt and herring were prized for their oil,which could be drained and stored(Haeberlin and Gunther
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 13
1930). Weirs placed across small streams, or large circular nets tied between two canoes were used to
catch large numbers of salmon during spawning.As weirs were labor-and time-intensive to construct,
they were often used year after year and repaired as needed. Flounder and trout were caught with long
lines or nets, while smelt and herring were caught with rakes made of cedar and ironwood pegs;
sturgeon were speared. Fish were dried or smoked to store the meat for winter.
Marine resources such as clams, barnacles, oysters, and crabs also contributed a great deal to peoples
subsistence. They were collected from large clam beds along the coast and on the islands (Tweddell
1974). Fishing and processing of the catch, as well as associated feasting,played a large and complex
role in the culture of the traditional people of this area.Each part of the process was subject to cultural
and religious influence. Success in fishing is related to guardian spirit power, not just for the act of
fishing,but also for acquiring materials and building fishing equipment, including canoes, gear,traps,
and weirs.Acquiring and maintaining gear to catch and process fish is regarded as equally as important
as the ritual paraphernalia to bless the canoes and catch(AFSC 1970).
Gathering and Processing
The daily lives of the traditional people of the central Puget Sound revolved around food gathering,
preparation, preserving and presentation. The abundant resources of the riverine and marine
environment rewarded hard work. Foods were collected based on seasonal availability and complex
social constructs developed to allow for maximum collection efficiency, redistribution, and healthy
alliances within and between groups. Women, through the centuries, devised ingenious methods of
gathering, preparing, and preserving food. They learned when the edibles were mature and ripe for
harvesting, and they developed tools and techniques for the work. They learned which woods to use,
and which kinds of fire best suited their needs;they designed and made their own cooking utensils and
equipment(Batdorf 1980:4).
Plant resources comprised the bulk of the diet of peoples in the greater Snohomish River watershed.
Roots of the brake fern, wood fern, dandelion,wild sunflower, cattail, and wild carrot were collected,
along with wild potatoes and bulbs of the camas and wild tiger lily. Wild strawberries, blackberries,
elderberries, salal berries, thimbleberries, gooseberries, huckleberries, blueberries, blackcaps, and
salmonberries were collected in the summer, along with acorns and hazelnuts. Most of the food
gathered in the spring and summer months was processed for storage,to be consumed during the winter
when food was scarce (Haeberlin and Gunther 1930). For the Stillaguamish, these resources were
especially plentiful in the Kent Prairie near Arlington and the Sauk Prairie on the Sauk River north of
Darrington, which they shared with the Sauk. Other groups were known to travel to Kent Prairie as
well—using a trail from Quilceda Creek to the prairie and the Sauk coming down the North Fork
Stillaguamish River (Bruseth 1926). These prairies were regularly burned to promote the growth of
berry and other harvestable plants(Blukis Onat and Hollenbeck 1981).
Among the plant resources, the cedar tree was also an integral part of traditional life that provided
material for clothing, houses, transportation, and tools as well as spirit power and central stability for
the traditional peoples of the Sound. "They held the supernatural cedar in high esteem, for, like the
bountiful salmon of the seas, the ubiquitous tree of the forest gave of itself to sustain and enrich their
lives" (Stewart 1984:19). In the more contemporary response of Salishan people to the new needs of
their peoples,the cedar is once again central to maintaining identity.
The Northwest Coast people are again a positive force in the land, facing up to
governments, industry and the business world— and themselves. Many are grasping
the tools of education to enable them to compete...and many are focusing on the old
art forms. The cedar tree is often central to that art, providing, as in the past, the raw
material they need: wood,bark,roots and withes [Stewart 1984:19].
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 14
The cedar tree was part of every moment of life in traditional culture and continues to be paramount to
the cultural activities of tribal members today. The respect for and importance of this tree is ubiquitous
today in ceremonial life,where clothing,regalia,ritual items,firewood,functional items and indeed the
buildings used for ceremonies are still made of cedar.Administrative buildings incorporate cedar,as it
is still considered a cornerstone of cultural identity(Stewart 1984).
Hunting
Mammals and birds were the primary prey. Birds were successfully hunted in coastal marshlands and
other wetlands. Following the traditional philosophy, much of the creature was used. Skin or fur for
clothing,flesh for food,sinew and other soft tissue for various uses,bone for tools,weapons,and other
functional devices such as straws. Many parts of animals and birds are also used in ceremony (Eells
and Castille 1985).
Deer, elk,beaver,bear,mountain goat,wildcat,groundhog, cougar,and birds were hunted using traps,
snares,nets, and sometimes bow and arrow. For those who would travel there,the Sultan Basin,north
of present-day Sultan,was a popular area for elk hunting in the late summer,while mountain goat was
hunted near Index (Tweddell 1974). Stillaguamish hunted mountain goat and elk in the mountains,
especially near the headwaters of the South Fork Stillaguamish River. Snares set up on mountain-goat
trails could last years (Bruseth 1926). Birds, especially ducks,were caught in large nets or snares. As
with all other food,the majority of the meat was dried or smoked to be saved for the lean winter months
(Tweddell 1974).
Material Culture
In addition to the archaeological collections and oral histories, much of what we know of traditional
Coast Salish material culture derives from ethnographic collections residing in local, regional, and
international museums, from the observations of ethnographers and historians, and photographs taken
in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. However, all these sources of information have been
defined by preservation biases.These biases are found in the greater preservation potential of stone and
hardy materials,the interpretations made by archaeologists and ethnographers for what they found,and
what they deemed important to collect or record. Much is known about stone tools due to how easily
they preserve and how important they were to early archaeologists and ethnographers,and it is only the
development of a more recent and broader focus on plant and other perishable materials that has
provided a similar depth of knowledge.
Stone implements (lithics) were made of local or exotic stone depending on what stone types were
available within a group's use area.Exotic stone was traded for or acquired if tribal members had access
to distant quarries. The stone was then flaked or ground to fashion a wide variety of tools. Knives,
spear, dart and arrow tips were usually flaked and then hafted to wood or bone for hunting and
processing game and plant materials. Mauls, wedges, adzes, and chisels were used for woodworking
and other tasks(Eells and Castille 1985). Stone mauls and spear points were polished by placing them
in a fire of fir needles then dousing it with water. Wedges made of elk horn and yew were used in
conjunction with the mauls for chopping trees. Fishing barbs,toggling harpoon, combs,pins,needles,
and many other items were fashioned from animal bone, horn, antler, teeth, and shell (Haeberlin and
Gunther 1930).
Salish groups relied heavily on plants to create functional, decorative, and ceremonial objects. For
example, western red cedar provided wood for longhouses, canoes, and storage containers, as well as
bark that,when shredded, could be woven to make clothing, capes, and head coverings. Sails made of
woven cattails were occasionally used with canoes (Haeberlin and Gunther 1930). Cedar and spruce
root were used along with other fiber to make baskets like those shown in Figure 9, for use when
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 15
foraging or cooking, some so tightly woven that they were waterproof Plants and trees were also used
to construct elaborate fish traps and weirs (Bruseth 1926;Haeberlin and Gunther 1930).
J
Figure 9: Examples of the kind of baskets made by Coast Salish people,"Puget Sound Baskets"(1912)
by Edward S. Curtis(Northwestern University Library 2003b).
Like many Salish groups, the peoples of the greater Snohomish River and Stillaguamish River
watersheds wove blankets of dog and mountain goat wool, often using alder bark and hemlock to dye
the wool pink(Figure 10). Feathers and fireweed were also incorporated into the blankets after being
pounded soft.The woolly dogs were kept by women who were weavers,and were valuable possessions,
as blankets were given as gifts at potlatch(Haeberlin and Gunther 1930;Tweddell 1974).Some clothing
was made from bear and buckskin, especially men's garments. Women wore cedar skirts and small
cedar bark caps in summer and added buckskin shirts and leggings in winter.Among the many uses for
marine shell, clam shell disc beads—"shell money"—were used for trade and as ear and nose
adornments(Haeberlin and Gunther 1930:29).
Summary
This overview has barely sketched traditional lifeways. The Salish People thrived for millennia and
developed a rich and complex culture within an environment that supported a large population prior to
European contact and the devastation of disease and political oppression. Despite these hardships the
peoples of the region have resiliency and continue to fight for renewed political and economic power,
at the same time working to preserve and maintain traditional cultural knowledge and beliefs.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 16
r
'it
i,
Figure 10: Example of the kind of weaving done by Salish people, "Goat-hair Blanket—Cowichan"
(1912)by Edward S. Curtis (Northwestern University Library 2003c).
Exploration and Immigration
The first documented exploration of the Pacific Northwest was a Spanish expedition in 1592, led by
Greek-born Apostolus Valerianos, more commonly known as Juan de Fuca, after whom the entrance
to the Salish Sea is named. Between 47' and 48' north latitude—after entering a "broad Inlet of the
Sea"de Fuca traveled for"twentie dayes ... passed divers Ilands ... went on Land in divers places,and
... saw some people on Land, clad in Beasts skins"(Purchas 1906 [1625]:416).
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 17
Some of the earliest English-language records of this region come from George Vancouver's
exploration of the Salish Sea. On June 4, 1792, he went ashore in the vicinity of Tulalip,near today's
Everett,Washington,and claimed for King George III the coast south to 39'20'N,which had been his
first landfall.Vancouver was convinced of the historical justification of his claim and his maps all show
British Territory from about 39'north latitude northward(Hayes 1999:85). The southern portion of the
Salish Sea is named after Vancouver's lieutenant,Peter Puget.
Beginning in the late eighteenth century,introduced diseases took an enormous toll on Northwest Coast
Native American populations. Estimates of mortality range from 30 to 90 percent, with the higher
estimate being the more likely result of several successive catastrophic episodes of, especially,
smallpox(Boyd 1994:28-29, 1998; Campbell 1991).
The Hudson's Bay Company
The first Europeans to stay for any length of time in the Puget Sound area were traders, trappers and
explorers associated with the Hudson's Bay Company (HBC). From the 1820s through to the 1860s,
HBC employees regularly traveled and traded around the Puget Sound(Harmon 1998:28-29). Tribes
around Puget Sound took benefit from trading and bartering with HBC,and many were hired as guides.
Fort Nisqually was established in 1833 at the southern end of Puget Sound,the first European settlement
on Puget Sound (Bagley 1915). Using the Naches, Snoqualmie, and Yakima passes through the
Cascades, even the Yakima people traded with HBC at Fort Nisqually and Fort Langley,to the north.
The influence of HBC in the Puget Sound was felt by native people and immigrants alike(Suttles and
Lane 1990:499-500).
Fort Nisqually was handed over to the US in 1846 after a treaty between Great Britain and the United
States had ostensibly settled the dispute over the Oregon Country;however,that treaty was vague as to
possession of the islands that straddled the new boundary—including San Juan Island. The HBC took
advantage of the confusion, built a log trading post on San Juan Island, and for several years traded
with the resident Native American population for fish,which they salted and transported in barrels that
they made on site(Bailey-Cummings and Cummings 1987).
At Garrison Bay, the HBC also began a new venture, Bellevue Farm, which was a salmon fishing
station and sheep ranch. In 1859 a dispute led to HBC officials demanding the arrest of an American
settler. The United States responded by sending sixty-six soldiers to set up a garrison at the southern
tip of the island.The British countered with warships and more soldiers.By September 1859 there were
three warships with numerous guns and roughly two thousand men on the British side, and nearly five
hundred Americans, although fewer cannons. A joint military presence was negotiated (McDonald
1990). In 1860 the HBC charter expired, and British claims to land south of the 49'parallel were laid
to rest.
The Wilkes Expedition
The United States Exploring Expedition led by Charles Wilkes was conducted in 1841 at a time when
the territories of the Northwest were under contention by British and American interests. In 1845, 31
members of the Michael T. Simmons party cut a wagon trail that became the northern branch of the
Oregon Trail at present-day Tumwater. Known as the end of the Oregon Trail or Cowlitz Trail,
Tumwater is the oldest permanent American settlement on Puget Sound(Stevenson 1977; 1986:158).
The discovery of gold in the Fraser River in 1858 brought more immigrants (Jeffcott 1995). Settlers
arrived at Alki Point in 1851 and proceeded to lay claims along the waterfront that became the
commercial center of Seattle by the 1860s.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 18
The Donation Land Claim Act of 1850
The pace of immigrant settlement was encouraged by the US 31't Congress,with the 1850 passage of
Statute 496, an unnamed Act known by various names, most commonly as the Donation Land Claim
Act,which legitimized a practice originally set in motion by the territorial Provisional Government in
1843 (Robbins 2022). The Act was
to create the Office of Surveyor—General of the Public Lands in [the] Oregon
[Territory],and to provide for the Survey,and to make Donations to Settlers of the said
Public Lands. ... granted to every white settler or occupant of the public lands,
American half-breed Indians included ... three hundred and twenty acres of land, if a
single man, and if a married man ... the quantity of one section, or six hundred and
forty acres, one half to himself and the other half to his wife,to be held by her in her
own right ... [US Statute 496, September 27, 18501
The law explicitly excluded African Americans and Hawaiians. Prior to its enactment Territorial
Delegate Samuel Thurston had told Congress that extinguishing Indian title was the"first prerequisite
step"to settling Oregon's land question,so Congress had earlier authorized commissioners to negotiate
treaties with that would,among other things,remove Native Americans from their land(Robbins 2022).
Treaties, allotments, assimilation and reorganization
What followed were the 1854 Treaty of Medicine Creek, the 1855 Treaties of Point Elliott, Point No
Point,Neah Bay,Yakama,and Walla Walla, and the Quinault Treaty of 1856,by which the American
government promised Native American tribes continued resource procurement rights, `land
reservations' (for some, but not all of the tribes), and a one-time payment. Once the treaties were in
place, settlement and commercial exploitation of previously tribal lands proceeded almost unfettered.
In addition, several subsequent acts of federal legislation created the circumstances that would hasten
the already severe breakdown of Tribal lifeways that followed European-introduced disease pandemic
in the 1770s that killed nearly 90%of the region's original inhabitants(Boyd 1994).
With the purpose of encouraging Tribal members to adopt the ways of the dominant culture—to
assimilate them—the Dawes Act of 1887 provided"for the allotment of lands in severalty to Indians."
The most charitable reading of this act was that it was intended to break the tradition of tribal
communalism that most immigrants believed was an obstacle to their `progress' and assimilation into
US society; more accurately it as a continuation of efforts ultimately to take even the Reserve lands
from the original inhabitants. Those who wished to take part were given either a portion of the
reservation on which they lived, or, if their tribe had no reservation, a plot of land in or near their
traditional use areas.In both cases the individual was granted US citizenship.Regardless of the reason,
fragmentation and fissioning of traditional communities was the inevitable result, which was made
worse by provisions of the legislation that enabled eventual sale of the land to non-tribal people. In the
47 years between its enactment and its dismantling, the Dawes Act was responsible for reducing the
acreage under Native title from 138 million to just 48 million(Newcomb 2018).
The disastrous effects of the Dawes Act did not go unnoticed.As part of F.D.Roosevelt's New Deal in
the 1930s,the Indian Reorganization Act(IRA)(1934)was intended to redress some of the worst effects
of the efforts at assimilation. It was:
[a]n Act to conserve and develop Indian lands and resources; to extend to Indians the
right to form business and other organizations;to establish a credit system for Indians;
to grant certain rights of home rule to Indians; to provide for vocational education for
Indians; and for other purposes.
Although the IRA also restored rights to land and minerals, it was a temporary and controversial
measure and by the end of WWII the federal government was back asserting their dominance including
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 19
the continued abusive practice of removing children from their families and placing them in
`Residential Schools,' where they were forced to speak only English and taught only Euro-American
history and culture. Only in the 1970s was this system dismantled,but the loss of cultural memory that
it brought about was and is devastating, to say nothing of the intergenerational persistence of
accumulated trauma it visited on the children who were subjected to this practice(see,e.g.,Brave Heart
and DeBruyn 1998).
Industry and infrastructure
Several large-scale commercial undertakings underpinned and dominated economic development and
fueled immigration in the region during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries: construction of
transcontinental railroads, logging and sawmilling, mining, and hydroelectric power projects. The
Northern Pacific Railway was the first transcontinental route to Puget Sound, completed in 1883 with
its terminus at Tacoma. 1893 saw completion of the Great Northern Railway, which terminated in
Seattle and was the only privately funded such railway in US history. These railways and their local
spurs promoted economic growth and prompted the founding and development of small, coastal
sawmill towns throughout the region. Timber harvested locally, or rafted by sea and river,was milled
and loaded on trains for transport to the east.
Arlington
Non-Indigenous exploration of the area around Arlington began in the 1850s. At the time, the Treaty
of Point Elliot of 1855 changed the social and political landscape of the area. Members of the
Stillaguamish tribe, spelled Stoluck-wa-mish in the Treaty of Point Elliott, were present for and party
to the signing.However,"no separate reservation was established for the Stoluck-wa-mish River Tribe.
Some moved to the Tulalip Reservation, but the majority remained in the aboriginal area along the
Stillaguamish River" (Boser 2023). By 1856,the U.S. Army established a trail through the area,but it
was heavily forested, and immigrants were slow to move there. It was not until 1887 that the area had
its first store, and soon after its first hotel. Nels K. Tvete and Nils C. Johnson established the store at
Stillaguamish River forks and the area grew to become Arlington. Lee Rogers and Al Dinsmore,two
loggers, owned the hotel, built near the store. The hotel and store mainly served area loggers (Oakley
2007a).
Among those who contributed to the early development of Arlington were Robert Kinnear and Robert
A. Rogers (Rodgers), each of whom owned portions of the Project area (Figure 11). Robert Kinnear
was born in Ceres,Scotland,on May 21, 1852(Ancestry.com 2024a).Kinnear immigrated to the United
States and married Mary Donaldson; he worked as a mechanic (Ancestry.com 2024a; Find a Grave
2024).In 1894,Kinnear purchased 160 acres in Section 25,Township 31 North,Range 05 E,including
a portion of the Project area(Bureau of Land Management[BLM] General Land Office [GLO] 2024a).
Robert A. Rogers was born in Illinois on May 12, 1860 (Ancestry.com 2024b). Rogers married
Katherine and worked as a carpenter (Ancestry.com 2024b). In 1891, Rogers purchased 160 acres in
Section 26,Township 31 North Range 05 E,including a portion of the Project area(BLM GLO 2024b).
Into the late 1800s, the areas that would become known as Arlington and Haller City competed for
dominance. Haller City—along"the on the riverbank with Arlington on higher ground to the south"
initially grew quicker than Arlington,but Arlington gained the advantage in 1890 when a railroad depot
was established there (City of Arlington 2024a; Interstate Publishing Company 1906:360). The first
business to start in the Arlington area was the Stillaguamish Star newspaper,beginning in August 1890
(Interstate Publishing Company 1906:360). By the next year, Arlington had an express office, a
warehouse, a post office,a hotel, and three miles of streets.Arlington's development was not hindered
by the Panic of 1893-1896 (Interstate Publishing Company 1909:361). In 1893,Arlington's estimated
population of roughly 500 residents enjoyed the developing area, which had come to include a bank,
shingle mills, general stores, a creamery and hotels (Cameron et al. 2005:117; Oakley 2007a).
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 20
2/ 23
r �,f./2 79 90
y- l J-• :ZI
227 -�
;— 2 -
Rogers y J'0. 2 0 _ ?�', b .olG�
Kinnear =,
0 Project Area
0 1,000 2.000 —+-
110111K==Feet
�Meters
70 `/ n
0 350 0
Figure 11: General Land Office map from 1875 showing early land ownership in Project vicinity.
From the late 1800s through the early 1900s, Arlington's economy was dominated by dairies, shingle
mills, and logging operations(Cameron et al. 2005:130). As Arlington began to surpass Haller City in
commerce and population, businesses were moved closer to Arlington (Cameron et al. 2005:117).
Arlington area residents had provided a 200-foot flagpole for the World's Fair in Chicago in 1893
(Oakley 2007a; William 1926:574). By 1900, Arlington's population was 852 (Interstate Publishing
Company 1909:361). In 1901,the Arlington Cooperative Association was started by local dairymen to
provide a market for dairy products (Oakley 2007c). By 1903, Arlington had incorporated, and was
then distinct from Haller City(Oakley 2010).
In 1904,the town also erected the same 200-foot flagpole at the St. Louis World's Fair(Oakley 2007a;
William 1926:574). The town was bustling, with the Northern Pacific Railroad coming to town three
times a week,and the arrival of the Sunset Telephone Company to provide telephone services through
the area (Oakley 2007a). In 1905, Neil Brown, Thomas Moran, and Nels K. Tvete organized and
incorporated the Arlington Water, Light&Power Company(City of Arlington 2024b; Oakley 2007b;
Whitfield 1926:538).
By 1908, mills surrounding Arlington were producing 375,000 board feet of lumber and 18 million
shingles monthly(Cameron et al. 2005:144). The population had grown quickly to 2,000 in 1908 and
Arlington had its own school system serving over 400 students. In the same year, Arlington dairies
produced over 7,500 pounds of butter a month(Cameron et al. 2005:144).
When the United States declared war on the German Empire in April 1917, residents from Arlington
were among the first in Snohomish County to ship out. Servicemen from Arlington were part of the 5th
Artillery Company that left on August 1, 1917 (Cameron et al. 2005:175). Arlington residents
participated in Red Cross campaigns and exceeded their quota by over 500 percent. In 1918,a wartime
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 21
parade in Arlington attracted a crowd of approximately 6,000 spectators who gathered around to hear
one of the organizations proclaim, "We Want Peace and Will Fight For it"(Cameron et al. 2005:179).
The Great Depression hit the area hard,however, and by the 1930s mill closures had led to high rates
of unemployment. In response, the Arlington Commercial Club leased acreage from M. Birckenmeier
to help the Civil Works Administration's (CWA) federal relief programs (Oakley 2007a). Arlington
also built an airport with funding from the federal Emergency Relief Administration,which succeeded
the CWA. The project was expected to provide work for 50-60 people. The first airplane landed there
on June 3, 1934. Soon, the airport was used for aviator practice and airshows. In 1935, the city was
promoting its use as a military base(Cameron et al. 2005:253).
In 1940, the U.S. Navy announced that it would be taking over the Arlington airport as an auxiliary
Naval Air Station.During World War II,the Army used the airport briefly as an adjunct to Paine Field
(Cameron et al. 2005:266). When the airfield returned to Navy use in 1943, it grew to a total of 1,162
acres, complete with two 5,000-foot runways, 33 buildings capable of housing 850 people, and 116
officer barracks (Cameron et al. 2005:273, 275). The Arlington Naval Auxiliary Air Station is now
listed on the National Register of Historic Places (Boswell and Heideman 2011).
In the years after World War II, Arlington continued to develop as a typical example of small-town
America. Logging and agriculture remained prominent industries, but many dairy farmers moved
toward the Skagit River Valley (Oakley 2007a). In the 1950s, the Arlington Cooperative Association
plant in Arlington came under the control of Darigold, which had accumulated several dairy
associations at the time. Darigold continued to operate the facility for a few years,but the plant closed
in the 1950s (Oakley 2007c). Then in 1969, Interstate 5 was completed, providing easy access to
Arlington from larger cities such as Everett and Seattle(Oakley 2007a).In 1970,Arlington's population
was only 2,261 (Cameron et al. 2005:297). Arlington experienced continued residential growth in the
1980s because of increases in the cost of living in the larger cities such as Everett and Seattle(Oakley
2007a).
In 1974, the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians petitioned the Secretary of the Interior for federal
acknowledgement and recognition as an Indian Tribe. By 1976,the Tribe gained federal status (Boser
2023). During the 1970s and 1980s, the Stillaguamish Tribe, championed by Tribal member Lew
Goodridge, constructed a fish hatchery and rearing ponds on Harvey Creek north of Arlington. The
Snohomish County Public Works Department and the Western Washington Indian Employment and
Training Program provided labor for constructing the rearing ponds in 1987 (The Arlington Times
1987). Upon his retirement, Goodridge stated that the "growth of a strong cooperative relationship
between the Stillaguamish and Tulalip tribes and the Washington Department of Fisheries [w]as the
most important development during his tenure as fisheries manager"(The Arlington Times 1988).
In 2007, Arlington had a population of approximately 15,000 (Oakley 2007a). In 2014, 64 acres of
Stillaguamish Tribe land was federally recognized as a reservation(Boser 2023). Arlington continues
to be popular today as a bedroom community for people who work in Everett and Seattle.
Edgecomb
Edgecomb is a neighborhood of the Arlington area,between the Arlington Municipal airport and State
Route 9,north of 172nd Street Northeast. A stump house, created by Gustav Erik Vilhem(Pettersson)
Lennstrom from hollowed out a large cedar tree stump, drew visitors around the turn of the century.
Lennstrom added a roof,window, door, and ventilation pipes for the woodstove inside. Around 1901,
famed Northwest photographer Darius Kinsey came to Edgecomb to photograph it. After Lennstrom's
passing, the land was sold at least twice, but what to do with the stump house was still a topic of
discussion. Ultimately, it was disassembled with the intention of reassembling it elsewhere someday
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 22
for display.Unfortunately,by the 1930s,the untreated wood began to disintegrate,and its remains were
incinerated(Blecha 2010). Darius Kinsey's photographs and postcard collections are all that is left.
Smokey Point
Smokey Point was originally known as Rex's Corner, at the intersection of Smokey Point Boulevard
(Old Highway 99) and Edgecomb Road(172nd Street Northeast), in west Arlington near Interstate 5.
(BOLA 2013:39).In the 1930s,Rex's Corner contained one restaurant,a small tavern,and a gas station
(Barrier 2004). In 1946, Mr. Rex sold the property to Eric and Pearl Shurstad, who renamed the
restaurant the Smokey Point Cafe (BOLA 2013:39). The Shurstads reportedly renamed it after one of
their favorite restaurants in their hometown,Minneapolis,Minnesota. The caf6 was well known for its
barbeque dinners and for the plumes of smoke that the open barbeque generated. The area lovingly
adopted the name Smokey Point as a result(Barrier 2004;BOLA 2013:39).The same day that Interstate
5 opened in 1958,the Shurstad's closed the caf6. The property remained vacant until it was demolished
(Bola 2013:39). The City of Arlington annexed Smokey Point in 1999 (City of Arlington 2024a). In
2012, "the Arlington-Smokey Point Chamber of Commerce began holding an annual barbecue cook-
off as a fundraiser inspired by the corner's history" (BOLA 2013:39).
4.3 Previous Archaeology
Franz Boas was the first archaeologist to work in the Pacific Northwest, and was notably the leader of
the Jesup North Pacific Expedition,of which Harlan I. Smith(1900, 1903, 1907)was also a part.After
the expedition, Smith continued to do extensive work in Washington and Canada. From this point to
the 1970s,archaeology in the Pacific Northwest was driven by academic interest in precontact peoples,
and by public interest in antiquity that,in part,museum collections satisfied.Archaeologists used a mix
of excavation,survey,and the ethnographic record to find sites and make inferences about past cultures.
The American Antiquities Act of 1906 and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966,as amended,
made federal agencies and those undertaking federally funded projects consider their impact on
archaeological sites and historic structures;this was the beginning of public-sector archaeology. It was
not until the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency, the passing of the National
Environmental Policy Act, and litigation involving them, which mandated environmental reviews for
federally funded projects.It was really at that time that cultural resource surveys became more common.
Since that time a variety of regulations and policies here in Washington State have broadened the scope
of archaeological and architectural survey.This burgeoning industry is now known as cultural resource
management (CRM). As part of the report preparation, and to aid in planning, cultural resource
managers review background research to inform past land use of an area and therefore what evidence
of past use is near or within a project area. Knowing the location and type of previously recorded
archaeological or historic sites, and the risk of encountering sites are invaluable information to the
archaeologist and project proponents alike.
For general overviews of the archaeology and cultural resources of the Pacific Northwest, see Ames
(1995, 2003, 2005a, 2005b), Ames and Maschner (1999), Borden (1950, 1951, 1975), Butler and
Campbell(2004), Carlson(1990),Matson and Coupland(1995),Matson et al. (2003),Meltzer(2004),
and Smith and Fowkes (1901). The central Puget Sound has been the focus of much archaeological
work due in part to the rapid growth of Seattle.In addition to those cited in the next two sections,more
recent archaeological overviews can be found in Blukis Onat and Kiers (2007a, 2007b), Lewarch and
Larson (2003), Lewarch et al. (2005, 2006), Mattson (1989), Miss and Campbell (1991), Mitchell
(1990),Nelson(1990), Stein(1984), and Stein and Phillips(2002).]
ERCI-Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 23
Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites
Records of three archaeological sites within about one mile of the Project area are on file at the
Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation(DAHP). A short description
of the sites is summarized in Table 1.
Table 1: Previously recorded archaeological sites within one mile of the Project area.
Distanc NRHP
Site# Type a Author,Year
Eligibility
(Miles)
45SN893 Historic Debris Scatter —0.5 Koch-Michael and Henley 2023 Not Eligible
45SN720 Historic Isolate —1 Needham 2019 Not Eligible
45SN26 Precontact Lithic Material —1 M. and K. 1961, Obermayr Survey/
1991,Larsen 2024 Inventory
Previous Cultural Resource Reports
There are ten reports on file with DAHP from previous cultural resource surveys within one mile of the
Project area;they are listed below in Table 2,along with annotations for those that included subsurface
investigation such as shovel probes(SP),machine tests(MT)or monitoring,and if a site was identified.
Table 2: Previous cultural resource reports on file with DAHP.
Author Title Date
Cultural Resources Survey for the City of Arlington SR 531 and 67th
Goetz Avenue NE Intersection Improvement Project, Snohomish County, 1995
Stutzman Washington, HRA, Inc., Report No. 425CIS. Pedestrian and subsurface
survey.No protected cultural resources.
Site Name:Hammette#82967 Arlington, Washington Snohomish County,
Hartmann Western Shore Heritage Services. No subsurface investigations. 2001
Pedestrian survey.No protected cultural resources.
Phase 2 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Sedro Woolley-Horse
Piper and Ranch Transmission Line Upgrade. Skagit County and Snohomish County,
Smith Washington, NWAA. 529 SPs and pedestrian survey. SK00404, 2009
SK00405, SN00406, SK00407, SK00408,SN00483,SN00484, SN00485,
SNO0486 and 45SK409.
Cultural Resource Survey of the State Route 9-State Route 531
Nelson and Intersection Improvement Project, Snohomish County, Washington, 2010
Troost Cascadia Archaeology. 77 SPs and pedestrian survey.No protected
cultural resources.
Baldwin and Cultural Resources Assessment for the SR 92 Plat Project,Arlington,
Chambers Snohomish County, Washington, Drayton Archaeology 23 SPs and 2015
pedestrian survey.No protected cultural resources.
Cultural Resources Survey for the Washington State Department of
Transportation's Edgecomb Creek Fish Passage Project, Snohomish
Emerson County, Washington,Archaeological and Historical Services Eastern 2016
Washington University. 12 SPs and pedestrian survey.No protected
cultural resources.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 24
Author Title Date
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Snohomish County PUD No. I
Arlington Remote Pole Yard Project,Arlington, Snohomish County,
Berger 2016
Washington, CRC, Report No. 1604M-2. 76 SPs and pedestrian survey.
No protected cultural resources.
Cultural Resources Survey for the Centennial Park Project, 172nd Street
SE and 67th Avenue NE,Arlington, Snohomish County, Washington,
Arthur 2019
Caldera Archaeology, Report No. 0819B. 40 SPs and pedestrian survey.
No protected cultural resources.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the NorthPoint Cascade Industrial
Center Project,Arlington and Marysville, Snohomish County,
Berger Washington, CRC, Report No. 2006G-2 3 positive SPs. 859 negative SPs. 2021
862 SPs and pedestrian survey.45SN773,45SN774,45SN775,
45SN776,45SN777,45SN778,45SN779 and 45SN780.
State Route 531 - 43rd Avenue Northeast to 67th Avenue Northeast
Schneider et Widening Project, Snohomish County, Washington—Cultural Resources 2024
al. Assessment, ESA. 49 SPs and pedestrian survey.No protected cultural
resources.
National Register of Historic Places Properties
The record of one National Register property within three miles of the Project area is on file with
DAHP.
45SK162 Naval Auxiliary Air Station, Arlington was built in 1934 and expanded throughout World
War II.It was used to train pilots and for commercial air until it was converted into a naval base for the
war. The base was deactivated in 1946 and the City of Arlington purchased it in 1959. Currently 160
businesses sit on part of the station while the rest is abandoned.The period of significance is from 1942
to 1946(Boswell and Heideman 2011).
Previous Cemetery Reports
The record of one cemetery within two miles of the Project area is on file with DAHP.
45SN543 Arlington Municipal Cemetery is an active gravesite. It was platted as Harwood Cemetery
in 1903. The city took control over the cemetery in 1999 and the name changed(DAHP 2010).
State Heritage Barn Register
Records of two barns on the Washington State Barn Register within three miles of the Project area are
on file with DAHP.A short description is provided below.
45SN585 Maude McCaully-Boland Farm started in 1883 when Mathew McCaully claimed the
homestead. His daughter,Maude,may have built the barn on the property around 1920 after he passed
away. The house dates to 1934. Currently, Bellanovas coffee operates the farm as a coffee roastery
(Maddy 2010).
45SN670Anderson Acres began at least around 1930 as that is when the barn is constructed.Almost
all of the buildings date to pre-1949 except for the house which dates between 1949 and 1950.The farm
was used to raise dairy cows but now stores hay(Anderson 2015).
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 25
Archaeological Expectations
According to the DAHP predictive model the Project area is in a moderately low-risk to moderate-risk
area.The closest site is a historic debris scatter approximately half a mile from the Project area,and the
closest precontact site is about one mile from the Project area.Numerous surveys within one mile have
conducted both pedestrian and subsurface survey.
The Project area is less than a mile from Portage Creek;there is a moderate probability of encountering
a range of precontact, protohistoric, and historic Native American cultural resources related to travel
between resources. Precontact artifacts or features might include those related to travel, hunting and
processing of land animals or temporary encampments.
Based on the first land claims there is potential to encounter historic cultural resources during
subsurface testing.We would expect to encounter isolated historic artifacts associated with agriculture,
logging, or residential use. Historic artifacts are older than 50 years and may include refuse such as
glass bottles,cans,nails, and ceramics relating to agriculture or residential use.
5.0 METHODS
This section provides details on the archival research and fieldwork methods that Equinox Research
and Consulting International Inc. (ERCI) employed in support of the Project. The research undertaken
for the Project uses best-practice archaeological survey techniques to record the presence or absence of
moderate to large archaeological sites, with the expectation that we may also find isolated artifacts or
features,or small artifact scatters.When sites or isolated artifacts are discovered ERCI records them on
DAHP forms in accordance with the Washington State Standards for Cultural Resources Reporting.
5.1 Archival Research
ERCI researchers
• Reviewed site forms and reports of previous archaeology on file at DAHP
• Reviewed other archaeological reports and related documents on file at the ERCI offices in
Mount Vernon
• Reviewed published information on the precontact, traditional Native American and historic
land use in and around the Project area
• Reviewed the County Assessor's records
• Reviewed General Land Office maps.
5.2 Fieldwork
Fieldwork entailed a meandering pedestrian surface survey and subsurface shovel probes (SP). The
pedestrian survey was carried out in conjunction with subsurface survey, while finding SP locations,
and moving between SPs. The technicians zig-zagged slowly up their individual transects,pausing at
alternating changes of direction to look backwards at trees and the ground surface.While surveying,in
addition to the possibility of surface artifacts, archaeologists were watching for culturally modified
trees and surface features such as cache pits,cultural depressions,wood building foundations and rock
cairns
SPs consisted of cylindrical pits dug by hand using round-nosed shovels,approximately 50 centimeters
(cm) in diameter,ranging up to 100 cm deep; beyond the reach of shovels, bucket augering was used
in approximately 10% of SPs. The bucket auger had a 10 cm diameter. All excavated sediments were
passed through'/4-inch mesh hardware cloth shaker screens.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 26
SPs were abandoned before reaching the maximum possible depth due to, among other factors, large
cobbles or boulders, large roots or groundwater, or extremely dense sediments(hardpan)was reached.
All excavated sediments were passed through'/4-inch mesh hardware cloth shaker screens.
SP location overview photographs were taken, along with photographs of their sedimentary profiles.
Once documentation was complete SPs were backfilled with the excavated sediments and the surface
restored to its original grade.No samples were removed from the Project area. Sediments encountered
were characterized and recorded on paper,and activities photographed using digital cameras or phones.
SP and other locations were obtained using a Global Positioning System(GPS)high-accuracy receiver.
Sedimentary matrix and shovel probe descriptions and photo logs are provided in the appendices.Field
notes, digital photographs and GIS shape files are stored at ERCI's offices in Mount Vernon,
Washington.
SP locations were determined using a mixed strategy judgmentally based on slope,topography,utilities,
and dense vegetation, and systematically at intervals ranging from 40 meters apart to 60 meters apart
depending on the landscape of the parcel.
Any artifacts recovered were described and photographed, then returned to the same SP from which
they came. Fragments of animal skeletal remains were immediately photographed and digital images
transmitted electronically to Alyson M.Rollins,MA,ERCI's biological anthropologist,who confirmed
whether or not the remains were human.
Human Remains
If human remains were encountered this is the procedure ERCI would have followed:
Any skeletal material encountered will be photographed and immediately sent to Alyson M. Rollins,
MA, ERCI's biological anthropologist, who will confirm whether or not the remains are human. If
determined human, those photographs will only be used for initial identification and will be
immediately deleted by all parties once identification is complete.
Following RCW 27.44, Indian Graves and Records, if ERCI's survey encounters human skeletal
remains all activity will cease that may cause further disturbance to those remains.The area of the find
will be secured and protected from further disturbance until the State provides notice to proceed. The
finding of human skeletal remains will be reported to the county medical examiner/coroner and local
law enforcement in the most expeditious manner possible. The remains will not be touched,moved,or
further disturbed. The county medical examiner/coroner will assume jurisdiction over the human
skeletal remains and make a determination of whether those remains are forensic or non-forensic.If the
county medical examiner/coroner determines the remains are non-forensic, then they will report that
finding to the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) who will then take
jurisdiction over the remains. The DAHP will notify any appropriate cemeteries and all affected tribes
of the find. The State Physical Anthropologist will make a determination of whether the remains are
Indian or Non-Indian and report that finding to any appropriate cemeteries and the affected tribes. The
DAHP will then handle all consultation with the affected parties as to the future preservation,
excavation, and disposition of the remains.
6.0 RESULTS
On June 27 and 28,and July 17,2024,ERCI conducted pedestrian and subsurface survey in the Project
area. The weather was alternately cold and rainy and warm and sunny. The field crew consisted of
Grace A.Berlin,BA,Isabella R. Conover,BA,Fiona L. Koehnen-Hots,BA,Rachel E.Pinkman,MA,
Isabella L. Pipp,MA, and Ashley A.Yates. No protected cultural resources were encountered.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 27
6.1 Pedestrian Survey
The Project area comprises five parcels, each with its own structures and independent landscaping
(Figure 12—Figure 14). Pedestrian survey results are described separately for each parcel,below.
-
4.
F
W
A
0 is!III
O Snohomish County Parcel _I a'•
O Project Area
0 250 500 -
Meters
0 75 150 �
J.
Figure 12: Sketch map showing labeled parcels.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 28
fW
vt
♦. TP
'^
NOR 1
; : ►.�:
Pedestrian Survey
0 Project Area
0 200 400 r.
Feet
Meters _
0 60 120
4 1
Figure 13: Sketch map showing pedestrian survey route.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 29
�r ate' r -
—NE
- .�A►.. �- '_ ,,d..y♦. yes $ - S,: ,� � Y! - a
L magau —NOW
.t r 9, .
"I J04
_ r
y �. .!.. ,� ` � `•'�� is d � _ y
iAgricultural Ditch`
1
0 Project Area MLyp '
0 200 400
` Feet
Meters
0 60 120 ,
Figure 14: Sketch map showing points of interest from pedestrian survey.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 30
8014 172nd St NE (Parcel 31052600100200)
This parcel contains a house, barn, gravel driveway, yard, and field (Figure 15—Figure 18). The
residential area is situated on a mostly level terrace on the east side of the parcel; from this area the
parcel slopes to the west and southwest. The field begins at the base of the steepest slope adjacent to
the house. The field is uneven and has multiple slopes. In the field there is a deteriorating wood shed
and decommissioned street spool.
Vegetation includes cedar, grass, Douglas fir, Himalayan blackberry, apple trees, cherry trees, birch,
bracken fern, holly, and decorative shrubs. Surface visibility was very low; exposed sediment was
visible from mole holes in the yard.
No protected cultural resources were observed.
Figure 15: View west, front of house and yard.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 31
v
.1
�t
Figure 16: View south,barn and driveway.
- f
``- '► 4, ``mat
Figure 17: View northeast,looking towards house from the base of steepest slope.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 32
Figure 18: View northeast of field at base of slope.
8118 172nd St NE,First Parcel(Parcel 31052600102300)
This parcel contains a house, detached garage, paved driveway, multiple sheds, an agricultural field,
and a yard(Figure 19—Figure 22). This parcel is also owned by the owner of 31052600102200;there is
an agricultural ditch running between and on the two parcels, some of it with a black plastic culvert
running through it(Figure 23).At its widest the ditch is approximately 2 m.
Vegetation on the parcel includes grass, an apple tree, and decorative trees and hedges lining the
driveway. In the yard there was a modern fire pit(Figure 24). There was little surface visibility—the
only exposed sediment was in the ditch.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 33
Figure 19: View west,house and garage.
IL10 00
z
Figure 20: View southeast,agricultural field.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 34
I _
r
r
r ,�s•' �f x ,.r k� ��`kfi x _ {, r�� . y, m u �' k.. 4 .��a.
Mot
ftim,'s
g at; �� .g.?�" ^5 � y 1 f kJ a ? S ,r• - h r
� '�' ��l�i t10 ��21��^K" ,7��4�,j.�'..'"'�yd(;l iy? xr „t A ,�,�•�,Ak 'Mi''Riw, 3'' �,� d 1: G E_ _#:' a:y .
~ �� $ ?�'',mod ,,. � �`Rr y� W"^7 i r ., 1 ��y:• a'+�A .v <?.p�^'rl
k- P fM:. ',�r'�u a:.a,{ !'-'"v v r ti?. .. q� •Lk'�'W''g�. Z,.
11®lin
Figure 21: View south,backyard.
' p
3?
I
1
j
V}Jn
Figure 22: View north,driveway.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 35
` y #>W"
.,
a t�m� �
Eli
�`� 1$• 4 +9{+'fit r " �: � d�.:�-�"`
f�
F-
Figure 23: View south, looking down ditch from northern end.
71
..
Figure 24: View south southeast,modern firepit.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 36
8118 172nd St NE, Second Parcel(Parcel 31052600102200)
This parcel is an undeveloped agricultural field (Figure 25). There were two cottonwood trees in the
field. This parcel is also owned by the owner of 31052600102300; and is connected to the agricultural
ditch running between and on this and the parcel at the same address (Figure 26).
ERCI saw a recent burnt area on the surface in the northeast corner of the parcel—it was similar to the
one on the other parcel,but had been scattered,with some vegetation starting to grow through it(Figure
27). As with the other parcel at this address, there was little surface visibility and the only exposed
sediment was in the ditch.
Figure 25: View northeast,overview of parcel 31052600102300 from the southwest corner.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 37
- r--
z
Vi
tio-•S�. r
'ids
-
a
r+orn�,.
AO;rhii
. r:v '�,+i'', bR •': -,f,.l t t S' mat,, !w 5; +'-.�._ >i,' �-
- y�r
Figure 26: View west, overgrown ditch at edge of field.
sm
C. �-:�
Figure 27: View west,recently burnt area on parcel 31052600102200
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 38
8210 172nd St NE (Parcel 31052600100100)
This parcel is vacant and overgrown with vegetation (Figure 28—Figure 30). There is a house
(constructed in 1914),a detached garage,a gravel driveway,and a structure that appears to be a carport
on the parcel.
Vegetation includes Himalayan blackberry, Douglas fir, cedar, rhododendron, alder, black pine,
stinging needle,elderberry,rose bushes, Scotch broom, and grass.
The house, detached garage, and carport are overgrown and in disrepair (Figure 31—Figure 34). The
carport is not listed on the county assessor's website. The carport does not appear to be suitable as a
residence, although it has a chimney (Figure 35 and Figure 36); it was surrounded by Himalayan
blackberry making it inaccessible during ERCI's survey.
If Project plans include removing this house, the lead agency for the Project may require a Historic
Property Inventory(HPI), as it is older than 50 years.
Figure 28: View north, driveway.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 39
'" S•sr 6 � � s ` �p
r
E.?
ti
S f' w•
�F�� _ �-Jn'� •-.� aurae �¢ �s','� P„ti�YG 9� � -..,�`�.��..�"^•n�� �'�i��'� �'�4r;,
4' g•'
4
w 13�� 4 .t -3- °S .r ^� fir•`" a� zf
�_ a�� r ,�,,. � ems-� a µ �' }}� ����.�h����s,�,�•p"�` �� -���� �-..�
��S t �"�'A�f �' � v ,s� �f �`T; 'C�. ����yy,���.���x�i�•���+,�h�•��t ,�����,�,'�4++��'�`''�z
'-'�`--3� ?fir +�'�.• Y �..'a� �,:�^ .,a, �4 s s ,"�^�c �r..t.,�i+�.�•��`�`t "s4j4�-r�,�•h.�'�-+,"�cw��i:s'...
.ter'{•.Y�.�1 B •,� �� A
• � 1 1. 1
+�r
Figure 31: View west, front porch of house.
p
Figure 32: View south, front of house.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 41
AM
Sl
�+
JAFr,.
r • t�R''S S
1
j
.w M
.I YsiJ "_T' li
t,y�i \1,:�1'r ,t _ �� <.�.. ��1 r'��•"r:i �i�l 11� �, �:
Figure 35: View east,carport.
,hr �
rf Mpg
r '
i
i
s ^�r
Figure 36: View north, carport with chimney indicated in red.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 43
8326 172nd St NE (Parcel 31052500200600)
The north portion of this parcel contains a house, gravel driveway, detached barn, and two sheds;
surrounding the residence there is a well-maintained lawn with decorative shrubs and trees(Figure 37
and Figure 38). Moving south from the residence,the parcel transitions into an overgrown field with a
few trees; continuing south the parcel turns into a densely treed area(Figure 39).
Vegetation in the parcel includes grass, holly, elderberry, Himalayan blackberry, salmonberry, cedar,
Douglass fir, stinging nettle, sword fern,willow trees,alder, and noble fir.Within the treed area,ERCI
encountered marshy ground and standing water by the southern end of the parcel (Figure 40); paths
through the dense vegetation had recently been cut and ERCI used them to complete the survey.
One colorless glass Gatorade bottle was encountered on the surface in the treed area(Figure 41).Based
on the design of the bottle it was manufactured between 1991 and 1999(Fandom 2024).A Dasani water
bottle wrapper was also observed on the surface in the treed area, as well as a car tire.
ERCI saw one deteriorating old-growth notched stump with at least four notches in the treed area
(Figure 42 and Figure 43). This notched stump indicates the land was likely logged around the
beginning of the twentieth century. ERCI does not intend to manage this stump as an archaeological
site.
Near the residence on the parcel, ERCI observed a 28-by 19-foot concrete foundation(Figure 44 and
Figure 45). ERCI excavated SP 21 next to the northwest corner of this foundation to determine the
depth of the foundation below the surface; is 42 cm thick in total, and 13 cm is below ground. There
were brick and brick fragments,cinder blocks,and pieces of wood on the foundation.
s
Figure 37: View southeast,residential area of parcel.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 44
�r
.j4
Figure 38: View southwest,residential area of parcel.
�Q s A `t
d -
` 1.
4 �r � rK`_ •
Fm
Figure 39: View east,ERCI in treed area.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 45
..� � Mtt' •.. it�•�� Y-`.+ t�a�'s" �i'•*a°f ,. °�hs ���'''''`11�.
..it '� y '�' "� t 17 N t t o� d' .:}"y��� -tea '�.��►,:'y�'
.ice 1 • y}�
�,( �t• 4p - S
ate.
.42
f
Figure 40: View south, standing water in treed area.
V,
a
rn
�7
•w' S
1
s.
U 1 _ 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 $7 16 19 2U 21 22 23 24
Centimeters
Figure 41: Plan view, colorless glass Gatorade bottle.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 46
" K
j
r,..
i r
-
d i
AK� ..�
6 '`r �jy 4J; 1w r ,� •�p +$' ,1, lxi i.. ` �".s ,,�.\ -
IV
•i
Figure 42: View west, old-growth notched stump.
M
�. .4
Figure 43: View west, old-growth notched stump.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 47
J
FrI
40
r�' .�y���r CAM✓�� r �1 �t .% ,.. � ��� t� c
Figure 44: View east, foundation.
,a
•may y..
161 t I 1
.1r tq,�; � a•'9A r ..k,a ?ill
y -
jf a a
J -�y,►A4�o"7a' 1 �i.-r F f M�•!1 J
- �i ♦1!n�R;./r !ij�.7 0, d• F wd i>,�
,t
Figure 45: View north, foundation.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 48
6.2 Subsurface Survey
ERCI excavated 58 SPs across the Project area, of which six were augered(Figure 46—Figure 49). SPs
were terminated early due to impassable roots,cobbles,extremely dense glacial sediment(hardpan),or
groundwater.
Two distinct sedimentary matrices were encountered.Matrix 1 (Ml)is a dark grayish-brown sandy silt
with gravels,pebbles,and occasional cobbles—this is a disturbed local sediment;M2 is a dark grayish-
brown to dark yellowish-brown sandy silt that is very dense,with few gravels,pebbles, and cobbles
this is intact glacial till. Five SPs had a profile of only Ml, one SP had a profile of M2, and all other
SPs had a profile of M1 overlying M2. Full sedimentary descriptions can be found in Appendix 1;
annotated sediment profiles can be found in Figure 50 and Figure 51.
Nondescript refuse was encountered in four SPs; all refuse was found in M1. SP 36 contained metal
fragments, ferrous nails, a colorless glass fragment, and an amber glass fragment (Figure 52). SP 58
contained a ferrous nail and colorless glass fragment. SP 48 contained a pink gum wad, a brick
fragment, a white plastic fragment, a colorless glass fragment, a green glass fragment, an amber glass
fragment, one ferrous nail,a plastic object, and red plastic fragment.
SP 21 was excavated next to the northwest corner of the foundation encountered on Parcel
31052500200600 during pedestrian survey,to determine the depth of the foundation below the surface
(Figure 53). Within the M1 in SP 21 ERCI recorded colorless glass fragments and wire nails (Figure
54).
No protected cultural resources were encountered.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 49
1 .: .z� •
IdI
i IN
Ot
fr
owl
4 ° . .
o Ir
Negative SP with Auger t � ; , ;: M ie
�' �••
• Negative SP
__ _ ,,ter "',� :.:fit• �.
1-1 Project Area •"3 .,C. ,,
0 200 400 t,y� S U `' • • e
Feet
Meters + ;,
0 60
Figure 46: Sketch map showing negative SP locations and those that were augered.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 50
.ram.Fill
04
'
ter pw
- t -M' :r •f - �'' :r --:rp. - -
GO
v
r
T
Figure 49: View northeast, SP 39 overview.
�yF; ,� C♦``,� s\w.�J ��f /',:ter/
�'�� t -a►s '"'` rat
M 1
M2ooe s,
11
•�. A
l A —
f
PO
.j
'�►('/a , • _c= y hardpanIr,
♦ %k
Figure 50: View south, SP 30 profile of M1 overlying M2.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 52
•:��� �_-rLQ';.�►JiC. fiH`, � ��`'��� ^�'I�`!�a< � r�._ �i.-.1�'�'j �.�,'
L � ♦ �� � tip... - J�� r! i• �•A/.-�\.•.r
�� tip±�;t�� !^wV^ ., �r � ��.'.�_� �.:fi '•-s -Mi, r�L�:���•/ r��~•4l��
1 j,ice ! v : t 1 :��►'� r .y?' vt� �;a7��w,
i e ;fir, • -/ _ �.
�-�� • mow- •�`-
��' M2 '---`, �-yam AL
Figure 51: View south, SP 9 profile of M1 over M2.
J �
co
1.
CAT
W �
U iu �uW�uU yu lnw lsWu�uUnui�uUuBiudiuiiu
0 1 2 3 ,'4 •'S B 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
� Centimeters
Figure 52: Plan view, SP 36 refuse from Ml.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 53
_ ty'
8f`'
�`•' �Y ' nae7�� t t/
q�
:w
Figure 53: View south, SP 21 overview with foundation, SP marked with shovel.
cD
J
O
T
N •
A
CT •�.r
�. CD
3 IJ Jlltlill• Jlt;i I 1 ;., I! t CD Illl IJi1�.1 I�Iif 'I �L' � i _
c;�rr,• ,�
Figure 54: Plan view,wire nails from M1 of SP 21.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 54
6.3 Discussion
ERCI's archaeological survey for 8014, 8118, 8210, and 8326 172nd Street Northeast (the Project)
encountered no protected cultural resources. There was evidence of modern residential land use in
both pedestrian and subsurface survey. One notched stump provided evidence of past logging.
Subsurface survey revealed a consistent sediment profile throughout the Project area, disturbed
sediment overlying intact sediment, including hardpan; cultural resources are most often found at the
interface between sedimentary deposits.
According to the DAHP predictive model the Project area is in a moderately low-risk to moderate-risk
area. The Project area is less than a mile from Portage Creek; there is a moderate probability of
encountering a range of precontact, protohistoric, and historic Native American cultural resources
related to travel between resources.Precontact artifacts or features might include those related to travel,
hunting and processing of land animals or temporary encampments.
Project ground-disturbing activities may yield isolated historic artifacts associated with agriculture,
logging, or residential use. Historic artifacts are older than 50 years and may include: refuse such as
glass bottles,cans,nails, or ceramics relating to agriculture or residential use.
One residence in the Project area is over 50 years old; it may require a historic property inventory if
Project plans include their removal.
Surveys such as this one are intended to yield information about moderate-to-large buried cultural
deposits and are not intended to reveal the existence of isolated artifacts, small sites, or features. Any
resources encountered should be responded to using the Unanticipated Discovery Protocol (UDP),
found in Appendix 3.
7.0 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
No protected cultural resources were identified during our fieldwork. The management
recommendations that we are now providing are based on our findings from this field survey. We
recommend that:
1. As the Project is still in the planning phase, we do not know the depth of ground
disturbance.An archaeologist should review the plans to see if our survey provided enough
coverage for the actual ground disturbance proposed.
2. If Project plans include removing the house older than 50 years on parcel 31052600 100 100,
a historic property inventory may be required; this should be confirmed with the lead
agency when there is one.
3. The proposed Project proceed as planned, following an unanticipated discovery protocol
(UDP)training given to all construction personnel by a professional archaeologist.A copy
of the Unanticipated Discoveries Protocol(UDP)to be kept on site at all times.
4. In the event that any ground-disturbing activities or other Project activities related to this
development or in any future development uncover protected archaeological objects or
sediments (e.g., old bottles or cans, charcoal, bones, shell, stone, horn or antler tools or
weapons), all work in the immediate vicinity should stop, the area should be secured, and
any equipment moved to a safe distance away from the location.The on-site superintendent
should then follow the steps specified in the UDP.
5. In the event that any ground-disturbing activities or other Project activities related to this
development or in any future development uncover human remains, all work in the
immediate vicinity should stop,the area should be secured,and any equipment moved to a
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 55
safe distance away from the location. The on-site superintendent should then follow the
steps specified in the UDP.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 56
8.0 REFERENCES CITED
Adamson, Thelma
1969 [19341 Folk-Tales of the Coast Salish. Memoirs of the American Folk-lore Society,27. G.E.
Stechert,New York.
Allen,Edwin J.,Jr.
1976 Intergroup Ties and Exogamy among the Northern Coast Salish.Northwest Anthropological
Research Notes 10:161-172.
American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)
1970 Uncommon Controversy:Fishing Rights of the Muckleshoot, Puyallup, and Nisqually
Indians.University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Ames,Kenneth M.
1995 Chiefly Power on the Northwest Coast. In Foundations of Social Inequality,edited by T.
Douglas Price and Gary M. Feinman,pp. 155-187. Plenum Press,New York.
2003 The Northwest Coast.Evolutionary Archaeology 12:19-33.
2005a Intensification of Food Production on the Northwest Coast and Elsewhere.In Keeping it
Living: Traditions of Plant Use and Cultivation on the Northwest Coast of North America,
edited by Douglas Deur and Nancy J. Turner,pp. 67-100. University of Washington Press,
Seattle.
2005b Tempo and Scale in the Evolution of Social Complexity in Western North America: Four
Case Studies. In North American Archaeology, edited by Timothy R. Pauketat and Diana
DiPaolo Loren,pp.46-78. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.
Ames,Kenneth M., and H.D.G.Maschner
1999 Peoples of the Northwest Coast: Their Archaeology and Prehistory. Thames &Hudson,
New York.
Amoss,Pamela T.
1977a The Power of Secrecy among the Coast Salish. In The Anthropology of Power:
Ethnographic Studies from Asia, Oceania, and the New World,edited by Raymond D.
Fogelson and Richard N.Adams,pp. 131-140. Academic Press,New York.
1977b Strategies of Reorientation: the Contribution of Contemporary Winter Dancing to Coast
Salish Identity and Solidarity.Arctic Anthropology 14:77-83.
1978 Coast Salish Spirit Dancing: The Survival of an Ancestral Religion. University of
Washington Press, Seattle.
1981 Coast Salish Elders. In Other Ways of Growing Old:Anthropological Perspectives, edited
by Pamela T.Amoss and Steven Harrell,pp. 227-248. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Anderson,Karen L.
2015 Heritage Barn Register Registration Form (45SN670). On file at Washington State
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia.
Anundsen,Karl, S.E.B.Abella,E.B. Leopold,M. Stuiver, and S. Turner
1994 Late-glacial and early Holocene sea-level fluctuations in the central Puget Lowland,
Washington,inferred from lake sediments. Quaternary Research 42:149-161.
Arthur,Ed
2019 Cultural Resources Survey for the Centennial Park Project, 172nd Street SE and 67th
Avenue NE,Arlington, Snohomish County, Washington. Caldera Archaeology. Submitted to
Williams Investments. On file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Bagley, Clarence B.
1915 Journal of Occurrences at Nisqually House, 1833. Washington Historical Quarterly
6(3):179-197.
Bailey—Cummings, Jo, and Al Cummings
1987 San Juan Island: The Powder-Keg Island. Beach Combers, Friday Harbor,Washington.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 57
Baldwin,Garth, and Jennifer Chambers
2015 Cultural Resources Assessment for the SR 92 Plat Project, Arlington, Snohomish County,
Washington. Drayton Archaeology. Submitted to SR 92 Associates. On file at the Washington
State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Batdorf, Carol
1980 The Feast is Rich. Whatcom County Museum,Bellingham,Washington.
Barnier, Chuck
2004"How Smokey Point got its name."2 June. The Arlington Times,Arlington,Washington.
Belcher,William R.
1986 Coast Salish Social Organization and Economic Redistribution. Northwest Anthropological
Research Notes 20:203-211.
Bennett,Matthew R.,David Bustos,Jeffery S.Pigati,Kathleen B. Springer, Thomas M. Urban,
Vance T.Holliday, Sally C.Reynolds,Marcin Budka,Jeffery S. Honke,Adam M. Hudson,
Brendan Fenerty, Clare Connelly,Partick J. Martinez,Vincent L. Santucci, and Daniel Odess
2021 Evidence of humans in North America during the Last Glacial Maximum. Science, 373:
1528-1531. https://doi.org/l0.1126/science.abg7586.
Berger,Margaret
2021 Cultural Resources Assessment for the NorthPoint Cascade Industrial Center Project,
Arlington and Marysville, Snohomish County, Washington. CRC. Submitted to NorthPoint
Development. On file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation, Olympia.
2016 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Snohomish County PUD No. I Arlington Remote
Pole Yard Project,Arlington, Snohomish County, Washington. CRC. Submitted to Snohomish
County PUD No. 1. On file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation, Olympia.
Bierwert, Crisca
1990 Lushootseed Texts:An Introduction to Puget Salish Narrative Aesthetics. Smithsonian
Press,Washington DC.
1993 New Voices in Native American Literary Criticism. Smithsonian Institution Press,
Washington,DC.
1999 Brushed by Cedar, Living by the River: Coast Salish Figures of Power. University of
Arizona Press, Tucson.
Blecha,Peter
2010 Edgecomb Stump House: A Slideshow.Electronic document,
https://dev.historylink.org/File/9658, accessed July 17,2024.
Blukis Onat,Astrida R.
1987 Resource Protection Planning Process:Identification of Prehistoric Archaeological
Resources in the Northern Puget Sound Study Unit. BOAS Inc., Seattle. On file at the
Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Blukis Onat,Astrida R., and Jan Hollenbeck
1981 Inventory of Native American Religious Use, Practices, Localities, and Resources: Study
Area on the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, Washington State. Mt. Baker—Snoqualmie
National Forest,Mountlake Terrace,Washington. Report prepared for the Institute of
Cooperative Research. On file at Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation, Olympia.
Blukis Onat,Astrida, and Roger Kiers
2007a Ethnohistoric and Geoarchaeological Study of the SR 520 Corridor and Archaeological
Field Investigations in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and HOV Project Including the Pacific
Interchange and Second Montlake Bridge Option, King County, Washington. Submitted to
Washington State Department of Transportation, Seattle,Washington.BOAS, Inc., Seattle,
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 58
Washington. On file at Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation, Olympia.
2007b Tribal History of the SR 520 Corridor and Archaeological Field Investigations Within the
SR 520 Bridge Replacement and HOV Project. Prepared for Washington State Department of
Transportation, Seattle,Washington. BOAS,Inc., Seattle,Washington. On file at Washington
State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
BOLA Architecture and Planning
2013 Corners Shaping Snohomish County History. Submitted to Snohomish County Office of
Economic Development. On file with the Washington State Department of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Borden,Charles E.
1950 Notes on the Prehistory of the Southern Northwest Coast. British Columbia Historical
Quarterly 14:241-246.
1951 Facts and Problems of Northwest Coast Prehistory.Anthropology in British Columbia 2:35-
37.
1960 DjRi3, an Early Site in the Fraser Canyon, British Columbia.National Museum of Canada
Contributions to Anthropology,Bulletin 162.National Museums of Canada, Ottawa.
1975 Origins and Development of Early Northwest Coast Culture to about 3000 B.C. National
Museum of Man Mercury Series,Archaeological Survey of Canada Paper No.45.National
Museum of Man, Ottawa.
Boser, Tracey
2023 About Us. Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians. Electronic document,
https://www.stillaguamish.com/about-us/, accessed July 17, 2024.
Boswell, Sharon, and Eileen Heideman
2011 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (45SN350). On file at Washington
State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Boyd,Robert T.
1994 Smallpox in the Pacific Northwest.BC Studies 101:5-40.
1998 The Coming of Spirit and Pestilence,Introduced Diseases and Population Decline among
Northwest Coast Indians, 1774-1874.University of Washington Press, Seattle.
1999 Indians, Fire, and the Land in the Pacific Northwest. Oregon State University Press,
Corvallis.
Bruseth,Nels
1926 Indian Stories and Legends of the Stillaguamish and Allied Tribes.Publisher not identified,
Arlington.
Brave Heart,M.Y.,and L.M. DeBruyn
1998 The American Indian Holocaust: healing historical unresolved grief.American Indian and
Alaska Native Mental Health Research 8(2):56-78.
Butler,Virginia, and Sarah Campbell
2004 Resource Intensification and Resource Depression in the Pacific Northwest of North
America: A Zooarchaeological Review.Journal of World Prehistory 18:327-405.
Campbell, Sarah K.
1991 Postcolumbian Culture History in the Northern Columbian Plateau A.D. 1500-1900.
Taylor&Francis,New York.
Cameron,David A., Charles P. LeWarne,M. Allan May, Jack C. O'Donnell, and Lawrence E.
O'Donnell
2005 Snohomish County:An Illustrated History. Kelcema Books LLC, Index,Washington.
Carlson,Roy L.
1990 Cultural Antecedents. In Northwest Coast,edited by Wayne Suttles,pp. 60-69. Handbook
of North American Indians,Vol. 7. Smithsonian Institution,Washington,D.C.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 59
Carlson,R.L., and P.M. Hobler
1993 The Pender Canal Excavations and the Development of Coast Salish Culture. BC Studies
99:25-52.
Chatters,James C.,Jason B. Cooper,Philippe D. LeTourneau, and Lara C. Rooke
2011 Understanding Olcott:Data Recovery at Sites 45SN28 and 45SN303, Snohomish County,
Washington. Prepared for Granite Falls Alternate Route Project, Snohomish County
Department of Public Works Everett,Washington. On file at Washington State Department of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Chatters,James C.,James W. Brown, Steven Hackenberger,Patrick McCutcheon, and Jonathan Alder
2017 Calcined Bone as a Reliable Medium for Radiocarbon Dating: A Test Using Paired North
American Samples.American Antiquity 82(3):593-608.
City of Arlington
2024a History of Arlington. Electronic document,https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/463/History-of-
Arlington, accessed June 9,2023.
2024b Arlington's Water System. Electronic document,
https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/823/Arlingtons-Water-System, accessed July 19,2024.
Clague,John J.
1983 Glacio-isostatic effects of the Cordilleran ice sheet,British Columbia, Canada. In Shorelines
and Isostasy, edited by D.E. Smith and A.G. Dawson,pp. 321-343. Academic Press,London.
Collins,June McCormick
1952 A Mythological Attitude toward Animals among Salish-Speaking Indians. Journal of
American Folklore 65:353-359.
1974a The Influence of White Contact on Class Distinctions and Political Authority Among the
Indians of Northern Puget Sound. In Coast Salish and Western Washington Indians,Volume II,
edited by D.A. Horr,pp. 89-204. Garland.
1974b [19461 A Study of Religious Change among the Skagit Indians of Western Washington. In
Coast Salish and Western Washington Indians,Volume IV, edited by D.A.Hoff,pp. 619-675.
Garland.
Croes,Dale R.
1995 The Hoko River Archaeological Site Complex: The Wet/Dry Site (45CA213), 3,000-1,700
B.P. Washington State University Press,Pullman.
Curtis, Edward S.
1913 The Salishan tribes of the coast. The North American Indian(1907-1930)Volume 9.
Plimpton Press,Norwood.
Daugherty,R.D., and R. Fryxell
1967 Archaeological, geochronological, and ecological investigations of the Ozette Village Site
Complex on the Northwest Coast of Washington.Manuscript on file,Department of
Anthropology,Washington State University,Pullman.
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation(DAHP)
2010 Cemetery Report:Arlington Municipal Cemetery. On file at the Washington State
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia.
Dewhirst, John
1976 Coast Salish Summer Festivals: Rituals for Upgrading Social Identity. 4nthropologica
28:231-275.
Dover,Harriette Shelton,and Darleen Fitzpatrick
2015 Tulalip,from My Heart:An Autobiographical Account of a Reservation Community.
University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Easterbrook,Donald J.
1963 Late Pleistocene Glacial Events and Relative Sea Level Changes in the Northern Puget
Lowland,Washington. Geological Society of America Bulletin 74:1465-1484.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 60
1986 Stratigraphy and chronology of quaternary deposits of the Puget Lowland and Olympic
Mountains of Washington and the Cascade Mountains of Washington and Oregon. Quaternary
Science Reviews 5:145-159.
Eells,Myron, and George P. Castile
1985 The Indians of Puget Sound: The Notebooks of Myron Eells.University of Washington
Press, Seattle.
Elmendorf,William W.
1971 Coast Salish Status Ranking and Intergroup Ties. Southwestern Journal of Anthropological
Research Vol. 27:353-380.
Emerson, Stephen
2015 Cultural Resources Survey for the Washington State Department of Transportation's
Edgecomb Creek Fish Passage Project, Snohomish County, Washington. Archaeological and
Historical Services Eastern Washington University. Submitted to Washington State
Department of Transportation. On file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Fandom
2024 Gatorade. Electronic document,https://packagingpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Gatorade#1991-
1999, accessed July 5, 2024.
Fladmark,Knut R.
1975 Paleoecological Model for Northwest Coast Prehistory.National Museum of Man, Mercury
Series No 43.National Museum of Man, Ottawa.
Franklin,Jerry F., and C.T.Dymess
1988 Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis.
Goetz Stutzman,Linda
1995 Cultural Resources Survey for the City of Arlington SR 531 and 67th Avenue NE
Intersection Improvement Project, Snohomish County, Washington. HRA,Inc. Submitted to
Barrett Consulting Group, Inc. On file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Greengo,Robert E., and R.Houston
1970 Excavations at the Marymoor Site. Reports in Archaeology No 4,Department of
Anthropology,University of Washington, Seattle.
Grier, Colin,Patrick Dolan,Kelly Derr, and Eric McLay
2009 Assessing Sea Level Changes in the Southern Gulf Islands of British Columbia Using
Archaeological Data from Coastal Spit Locations. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 33:254-
280.
Guilmet,George M.,Robert T. Boyd,David L.Whited, and Nile Thompson
1991 The Legacy of Introduced Disease: The Southern Coast Salish.American Indian Culture
and Research Journal 15(4):1-32.
Gunther, Erna
1928 A Further Analysis of the First Salmon Ceremony.University of Washington publications in
anthropology,Volume 2,No. 5.University of Washington Press, Seattle.
1945 Ethnobotany of Western Washington. University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Haeberlin,Hermann
1924 Mythology of Puget Sound.Journal ofAmerican Folk-Lore 37:137-438.
Haeberlin,Hermann, and Erna Gunther
1930 Indians of Puget Sound.University of Washington Publications in Anthropology Volume 4,
No. 1.University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Harmon,Alexandra
1998 Indians in the Making:Ethnic Relations and Indian Identities in the Puget Sound.
University of California Press,Berkeley.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 61
Harris, Cole
1994 Voices of Disaster: Smallpox around the Strait of Georgia in 1782. Ethnohistory 41:591-
626.
Hartmann, Glen
2001 Site Name:Hammette#82967 Arlington, Washington Snohomish County. Western Shore
Heritage Services. Submitted to American Tower Corporation. On file at the Washington State
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia.
Hayes,Derek
1999 Historical Atlas of the Pacific Northwest:Maps of Exploration and Discovery. Sasquatch
Books, Seattle.
Hebda,R.J. (editor)
2000 Burns Bog Ecosystem Review: Synthesis Report for Burns Bog, Fraser River Delta, South-
Western British Columbia. Canada. Environmental Assessment Office,Victoria,British
Columbia.
Hebda,R.J.,and R.W. Mathewes
1984 Holocene History of Cedar and Native Indian Cultures of the North American Pacific Coast.
Science 225:711-713.
Heusser, Calvin J.
1983 Vegetational History of the Northwestern U.S. Including Alaska. In Late Quaternary
Environments of the United States. Vol. 1: The Late Pleistocene,edited by H.E. Wright Jr.,pp.
239-258.University of Minnesota Press,Minneapolis.
Holliday,Vance T.
1992 Soils in Archaeology. Smithsonian Institution Press,Washington,D.C.
Howay,F.W.
1918 The Dog's Hair Blankets of the Coast Salish.Pacific Northwest Quarterly 9(2):83-92.
Hutchings Richard M., and S.K. Campbell
2005 The Importance of Deltaic Wetland Resources: A Perspective from the Nooksack River
Delta,Washington State.Journal of Wetland Archaeology 5:17-34.
Interstate Publishing Company
1906 An illustrated history of Skagit and Snohomish Counties; their people, their commerce and
their resources, with an outline of the early history of the state of Washington endorsed as
authentic by local committees ofpioneers. Interstate Publishing Company,place of publication
unknown.
Jeffcott,Percival Robert
1995 [1949]Nooksack Tales and Trails. Sincyrly Ours Publishing,Bellingham,Washington.
Jorgensen,Joseph G.
1969 Salish Language and Culture, a Statistical Analysis of Internal Relationships, History and
Evolution. Language Science Monographs No. 3. Indiana University,Bloomington.
Kelsey,Harvey M.,Brian Sherrod, Samuel Y. Johnson, and Shawn V.Dadisman
2004 Land-level changes from a late Holocene earthquake in the northern Puget Lowland,
Washington. Geology 32:469-472.
Kew,John Edward Michael
1972 Coast Salish Ceremonial Life:Status and Identity in a Modern Village.PhD dissertation,
Department of Anthropology,University of Washington, Seattle.
1990 Central and Southern Coast Salish Ceremonies Since 1900. In Northwest Coast,edited by
Wayne Suttles,pp. 476-480.Handbook of North American Indians,Vol. 7. Smithsonian
Institution,Washington,DC.
Kiers,Roger A.
2014 Appendix G: Luminescence Dating of Fire-modified Rock from 45SN417, Granite Falls,
Snohomish County,Washington. In Final Report of Archaeological Investigations for the
Woodhaven Site (45SN417), Granite Falls, Snohomish County, Washington. Report prepared
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 62
for Woodhaven Estates, LLC,by Garth Baldwin and Jennifer Chambers,pp. 224-228. On file
at Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
King,Arden Ross
1950 Cattle Point:A Stratified Site in the Southern Northwest Coast Region.Memoirs of the
Society for American Archaeology,No. 7. Society for American Archaeology,Menasha,
Wisconsin.
Koch-Michael,Leah, and Madison Henley
2023 State of Washington Archaeological Site Inventory Form (45SN893). On file at Washington
State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Kopperl,Robert E. (editor)
2016 Results of Data Recovery at the Bear Creek Site (45KI839)King County, Washington. On
file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia.
Kopperl,Robert E.,Amanda K. Taylor, Christian J.Miss,Kenneth M. Ames, and Charles M. Hodges
2015 The Bear Creek Site(45KI839), a Late Pleistocene—Holocene Transition Occupation in the
Puget Sound Lowland,King County,Washington.PaleoAmerica 1:116-120.
Kroll Map Company
1934 Arlington, Lakewood, English, Edgecomb, Sisco.Electronic map,
https://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/JS/31600/Page+14++Arllington++Lakewood++Engl
ish++Edgecomb++Sisco/Snohomish+County+1934/Washington/, accessed June 9,2023.
1952 [19431 Township 31 N, Range 5 E, English Lakewood, Edgecomb, Stimson,Arlington
Airport. Electronic map,
https://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/JS/488898/Page+14+Township+31+N++Range+5+
E++English+Lakewood++Edgecomb++Stimson++Arlington+Airport/Snohomish+County+194
3+Revised+1952/Washington/, accessed June 9,2023.
1960 Township 31 North, Range 5 East,Arlington, Edgecomb, Stimsons Crossing. Electronic
document,
https://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/56183/Township+3 l+North++Range+5+East++
Arlington++Edgecomb++Stimsons+Crossing+++Page+039/Snohomish+County+1960+Publis
hed+by+Kroll/Washington/, accessed June 9,2023.
Larsen, Susan
2024 State of Washington Archaeological Site Inventory Form (45SN26). On file at Washington
State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Lewarch,Dennis E., and Lynn L. Larson
2003 Revised Draft Historic Context Statement Hunter-Fisher-Gatherer Resources King County
Cultural Resources Protection Project. Larson Anthropological Archaeological Services
Limited, Gig Harbor,Washington. On file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology
and Historic Preservation,Olympia.
Lewarch,Dennis E., Gretchen A.Kaehler,and Lynn L.Larson
2005 FINAL: Seattle Monorail Project Green Line, Seattle, King County, Washington
Archaeological Resources Treatment and Monitoring Plans. Submitted to Seattle Monorail
Project, Seattle,WA. LAAS Technical Report#2004-18. Larson Anthropological
Archaeological Services Limited, Gig Harbor,Washington. On file at the Washington State
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia.
Lewarch,Dennis E., Gretchen A.Kaehler,Elizabeth C. Reetz,Nichole Gillis, and Lynn L.Larson
2006 Brightwater Regional Wastewater Treatment System King County and Snohomish County,
Washington Archaeological Resources Treatment and Monitoring Plans.Prepared for King
County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Wastewater Treatment Division. Larson
Anthropological Archaeological Services Limited, Gig Harbor.
Mack, C.A.,James C. Chatters, and Anna M. Prentiss
2010 Archaeological Data Recovery at the Beech Creek Site (45LE415), Gifford Pinchot
National Forest, Washington.Report prepared for United States Department of Agriculture,
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 63
Forest Service,Pacific Northwest Region,Heritage Program, Gifford Pinchot National Forest.
On file at Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia.
Maddy, Georgean
2010 Heritage Barn Register Registration Form (45SN585). On file at Washington State
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia.
Mansfield,Emily
1993 Balance and Harmony: Peacemaking in Coast Salish Tribes of the Pacific Northwest.
Meditation Quarterly 10(4):339-353.
Matson,R.G. (editor)
1976 The Glenrose Cannery Site. Mercury Series,National Museum of Man,Archaeological
Survey of Canada Paper No. 52.National Museums of Canada, Ottawa.
2010 The Crescent Beach Site and the Place of the Locarno Beach Phase. Laboratory of
Archaeology,University of British Columbia. Electronic document,
https://open.library.ubc.ca/soa/cIRcle/collections/facultyresearchandpublications/523 83/items/
1.0041644, accessed February 15,2023.
Mattson, John L.
1989 Puget Sound prehistory:postglacial adaptations in the Puget Sound basin with
archaeological implications for a solution to the "Cascade Problem."Ph.D. dissertation,
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. U.M.I. Dissertation Information Service,Ann
Arbor.
Matson,R.G., and Gary Coupland
1995 The Prehistory of the Northwest Coast.Academic Press, San Diego.
Matson,R.G., Gary Coupland, and Quentin Mackie(editors)
2003 Emerging from the Mist: Studies in Northwest Coast Culture History. Pacific Rim
Archaeology.UBC Press,Vancouver and Toronto.
McDonald,Lucile Saunders
1990 Making History: The People Who Shaped the San Juan Islands. Harbor Press,Friday
Harbor,Washington.
McLaren,Duncan,Daryl Fedje,Murray B. Hay, Quentin Mackie,Ian J.Walker,Dan H. Shugard,
Jordan B.R. Eamerd, Olav B. Liane, and Christina Neudorf
2014 A post-glacial sea level hinge on the central Pacific coast of Canada. Quaternary Science
Reviews 97:148-169.
McLaren,Duncan, Daryl Fedje,Angela Dyck, Quentin Mackie,Alisha Gauvreau, and Jenny Cohen
2018 Terminal Pleistocene epoch human footprints from the Pacific coast of Canada. PLoS ONE
13(3):e0193522.
Meltzer,D.J.
2004 Peopling of North America. In The Quaternary Period in the United States, edited by A.R.
Gillespie, S.C. Porter,and B.F. Atwater,pp. 505-563.Developments in Quaternary Science.
Elsevier, Seattle
Metsker, Charles F.
1936 Township 31 N., Range 5 E, Edgecomb,Arlington, Lakewood. Electronic document,
https://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/JS/1603269/Page+015+++Township+31+N+++Ran
ge+5+E++Edgecomb++Arlington++Lakewood/Snohomish+County+1936/Washington/,
accessed June 9,2023.
Mierendorf,Robert R.,Franklin F.Foit,Jr.,and Darby C. Stapp
2018 Holocene Geochronology and Archaeology at Cascade Pass, Northern Cascade Range,
Washington. Journal of Northwest Anthropology Memoir 16.Northwest Anthropology LLC,
Richland,Washington.
Miller,Bruce G.
1993 The Press,the Boldt Decision,and Indian—White Relations.American Indian Culture and
Research Journal 17(2):75-97.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 64
1995 Folk Law and Contemporary Coast Salish Tribal Code.American Indian Culture and
Research Journal 19(3):141-164.
1997 The"Really Real"Border and the Divided Salish Community. BC Studies 112:63-79.
1998 The Great Race of 1941:A Coast Salish Public Relations Coup. The Pacific Northwest
Quarterly 89(3):127-135.
2001 The Problem of Justice: Tradition and Law in the Coast Salish World.University of
Nebraska Press,Lincoln.
Miller,Bruce G.,and Daniel L. Boxberger
1994 Creating Chiefdoms: The Puget Sound Case.Ethnohistory 41:267-293.
Minard,James P.
1985 Geologic map of the Arlington East quadrangle, Snohomish County, Washington.U.S.
Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-1739. United States Department of
the Interior,U.S. Geological Survey,Virginia.
Miss, Christian J.,and Sarah K. Campbell
1991 Prehistoric Cultural Resources of Snohomish County, Washington. Prepared for the
Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Contract No. 2-90-710-18.
NWAA,Inc., Seattle. On file at Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation, Olympia.
Mitchell,Donald H.
1990 Prehistory of the Coasts of Southern British Columbia and Northern Washington. In
Northwest Coast,edited by W. Suttles,pp. 340-358. Handbook of North American Indians.
vol. 7,W.C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution,Washington,D.C.
M.,H., and R. S. K.
1961 State of Washington Archaeological Site Inventory Form (45SN26). On file at Washington
State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Mooney,Kathleen A.
1976 Urban and Reserve Coast Salish Employment: A Test of Two Approaches to the Indian's
Niche. Southwestern Journal of Anthropological Research 32:390-410.
Moss,Madonna
1986 Native American Religious use in the Pacific Northwest: A Case Study from the Mt. Baker
Snoqualmie National Forest.Northwest Anthropological Research Notes 20:191-201.
Moss,Madonna L.,Dorothy M. Peteet, and Cathy Whitlock.
2007 Mid-Holocene culture and climate on the Northwest Coast of North America. In Climate
change and cultural dynamics: a global perspective on mid-Holocene transitions,edited by
David G.Anderson,Kirk A. Maasch,and Daniel H. Sandweiss,pp. 491-530.Academic Press,
London.
National Cooperative Soil Survey
2017 Tokul Series. Electronic document,
https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD—Docs/T/TOKUL.html, accessed June 26,2024.
Needham,Jill
2019 State of Washington Archaeological Site Inventory Form (45SN720). On file at Washington
State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Nelson, Charles M.
1990 Prehistory of the Puget Sound Region. In Northwest Coast, edited by Wayne Suttles,pp.
481-484. Handbook of North American Indians,Vol. 7,William C. Sturtevant, general editor.
Smithsonian Institution,Washington,D.C.
Nelson,Margaret, and Teresa Trost
2010 Cultural Resource Survey of the State Route 9-State Route 531 Intersection Improvement
Project, Snohomish County, Washington. Cascadia Archaeology. Submitted to Washington
Department of Transportation. On file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation, Olympia.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 65
Newcomb, Steven
2018 The 1887 Dawes Act: The U.S. Theft of 90 Million Acres of Indian Land. Electronic
document,https://ictnews.org/archive/the-1887-dawes-act-the-us-theft-of-90-million-acres-of-
indian-land,accessed June 26,2024.
Northwestern University Library
2003a"Mat House—Skokomish,"by Edward S. Curtis. Electronic document,
https://dc.library.northwestern.edu/items/e6l8l8e9-67dl-460c-8a32-143c28305d66, accessed
May 12,2023.
2003b"Puget Sound Baskets,"by Edward S. Curtis. Electronic document,
https://dc.library.northwestern.edu/items/18a693b3-fb7c-4f2a-96cc-c4f255464ffO, accessed
May 12,2023.
2003c "Goat-hair Blanket—Cowichan,"by Edward S. Curtis. Electronic document,
https://dc.library.northwestern.edu/items/36113d4f-4dl9-4ac6-897e-Ode50c07bedd, accessed
May 12,2023.
Oakley,Janet
2007a Arlington—Thumbnail History. Electronic document,
https://www.historylink.org/file/8416, accessed June 9,2023.
2007b Arlington Water, Light&Power Co. is organized in Snohomish County on September 11,
1905,to build Jim Creek Dam. Electronic document,https:Hhistorylink.org/File/8345, accessed
June 9,2023.
2007c Arlington(Snohomish County)dairymen start a co-op in 1901. Electronic document,
https://www.historylink.org/File/8366,accessed July 17,2024.
2010 Arlington incorporates on May 20, 1903. Electronic document,
https://www.historylink.org/File/9511,accessed June 9,2023.
Oberymayr,Erich
1991 State of Washington Archaeological Site Inventory Form (45SN26). On file at Washington
State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Piper,Jessica, and Ross Smith
2009 Phase 2 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Sedro Woolley-Horse Ranch Transmission
Line Upgrade. Skagit County and Snohomish County, Washington. NWAA. Cascadia
Archaeology. Submitted to Washington Department of Transportation. On file at the
Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Pojar,Jim, and Andy MacKinnon
1994 Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Lone Pine,Vancouver,British Columbia.
Porter, Stephen C., and Terry W. Swanson
1998 Radiocarbon age constraints on rates of advance and retreat of the Puget Lobe of the
Cordilleran ice sheet during the last glaciation. Quaternary Research 50:205-213.
Purchas, Samuel
1906 [16251 Hakluytus Posthumus or Purchas His Pilgrimes: Contayning a History of the World
in Sea Voyages and Lande Travells by Englishmen and others. Volume XIV. University of
Glasgow Press, Glasgow, Scotland. Electronic document,
https://archive.org/details/hakluytasposthul5purcgoog,accessed June 26,2024.
Robbins,William G.
2022 Oregon Donation Land Act. Electronic document,
https://oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/oregon_donation_land_act/#.WflrQduZNTZ, accessed
June 26,2024.
Schneider, Chanda R.,Kate Hannah,Bryan Hoyt, Chris Lockwood,and Jason B. Cooper
2024 State Route 531 - 43rd Avenue Northeast to 67th Avenue Northeast Widening Project,
Snohomish County, Washington—Cultural Resources Assessment. ESA. Submitted to
Washington Department of Transportation. On file at the Washington State Department of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 66
Sherrod,Brian L.,Robert C.Bucknam, and Estella B. Leopold
2000 Holocene Relative Sea Level Changes along the Seattle Fault at Restoration Point,
Washington. Quaternary Research 54(3): 384-393.
Smith,Harlan I.
1900 Archaeological Investigations on the North Pacific Coast in 1899.American Anthropologist
3:563-567.
1903 Shell Heaps of the Lower Fraser, British Columbia.American Museum of Natural History
Memoirs 3(4).AMNH,New York.
1907 Archaeology of the Gulf of Georgia and Puget Sound. American Museum of Natural
History Memoir 4,Part 6,pp. 301-441.American Museum of Natural History,New York.
Smith,Harlan I., and Gerald Fowkes
1901 Cairns of B.C. and Washington. American Museum of Natural History Memoir 4,Part 2,
pp. 55-755. American Museum of Natural History,New York.
Smith,Marian
1941 The Coast Salish of Puget Sound.American Anthropologist 43:197-211.
1950 The Nooksack,the Chilliwack, and the Middle Fraser. Pacific Northwest Quarterly 41:330-
341.
1956 The Cultural Development of the Northwest Coast. Southwestern Journal of
Anthropological Research 12:272-294.
Snyder, Sally
1954 Aboriginal Saltwater Fisheries: Swinomish,Lower Skagit,Kikialus, and Samish Tribes of
Indians. Master's thesis,Department of Sociology and Anthropology,University of Windsor,
Ontario.
1964 Skagit Society and its Existential Basis: An Ethnofolkloric Reconstruction.Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation,University of Washington, Seattle,Washington.
1980 Aboriginal Settlements in the Skagit Drainage System. In Cultural Resource Overview and
Sample Survey of the Skagit Wild and Scenic River Study Area on the Mt. Baker—Snoqualmie
National Forest, Washington State,Volume 2,by Astrida R. Blukis Onat,Lee A.Bennett, and
Jan L. Hollenbeck,pp. 19-39. Prepared for the Mt. Baker—Snoqualmie National Forest by the
Institute of Cooperative Research. On file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology
and Historic Preservation,Olympia.
1981 Swinomish,Upper Skagit and Sauk-Suiattle. In Inventory of Native American Religious
Use, Practices, Localities and Resources: Study Area on the Mt. Baker—Snoqualmie National
Forest, Washington State, edited by Astrida R. Blukis Onat and Jan L. Hollenbeck,pp. 213-
308. Report prepared for Mt. Baker—Snoqualmie National Forest, Seattle,Washington. Institute
of Cooperative Research,P.O. Box 20275,Broadway Station, Seattle,Washington 98102.
Soil Survey Staff,Natural Resources Conservation Service,United States Department of Agriculture.
2023a Web Soil Survey—Snohomish County Area,Washington. Spatial Data. Electronic
document,https://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx,accessed June 26,
2024.
2023b Web Soil Survey—Snohomish County Area,Washington. Tabular Data. Electronic
document,https://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx,accessed June 26,
2024.
Spier,Leslie
1935 The Prophet Dance of the Northwest and its Derivatives: The Source of the Ghost Dance.
George Banta,Menasha.
1936 Tribal Distribution in Washington. General Series in Anthropology 3. George Banta,
Menasha.
Stein,Julie K.
1984 Interpreting the Stratigraphy of Northwest Coast Shell Middens. Tebiwa 2:26-34.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 67
Stein, Julie K., and Laura S. Phillips(editors)
2002 Vashon Island Archaeology:A View from Burton Acres Shell Midden. University of
Washington Press, Seattle.
Stewart,Hilary
1973 Artifacts of the Northwest Coast Indians. Hancock House, Surrey, British Columbia.
1977 Indian Fishing:Early Methods on the Northwest Coast. Douglas&McIntyre,Vancouver.
1979 Looking at Indian Art of the Northwest Coast. Douglas&McIntyre,Vancouver.
1984 Cedar: Tree of Life to the Northwest Coast Indians. University of Washington Press,
Seattle.
1996 Stone, Bone,Antler&Shell:Artifacts of the Northwest Coast. 2nd ed. Douglas&McIntyre,
Vancouver.
Stevenson, Shanna B.
1977 National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination form for 45DT169, New
Market: [Stehtsamish] (prehistoric)/Tumwater Historic District. On file,Department of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
1986 Olympia, Tumwater, and Lacey a Pictorial History(Revised). The Donning Company
Publishers,Virginia Beach,VA.
Suttles,Wayne
1957 The Plateau Prophet Dance Among the Coast Salish. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology
13(4):352-396.
1958 Private Knowledge,Morality,and Social Classes among the Coast Salish.American
Anthropologist 60:497-507.
1960 Affinal Ties, Subsistence, and Prestige among the Coast Salish.American Anthropologist
62:296-305.
1974 [1951] Coast Salish and Western Washington Indians I.Economic Life of the Coast Salish
of Haro and Rosario Straits. Ph.D. dissertation,Department of Anthropology,University of
Washington, Seattle. Garland.
1987 Coast Salish Essays.University of Washington Press, Seattle.
1990a Central Coast Salish. In Northwest Coast,edited by Wayne Suttles,pp. 453-475.
Handbook of North American Indians,Volume 7. Smithsonian Institution,Washington,D.C.
1990b Northwest Coast.Handbook of North American Indians.No.7. Smithsonian Institution,
Washington,D.C.
Suttles,Wayne, and Barbara Lane
1990 Southern Coast Salish. In Northwest Coast, edited by Wayne Suttles,pp. 485-502.
Handbook of North American Indians,Volume 7. Smithsonian Institution,Washington,D.C.
Taylor,Amanda K.,Julie K. Stein, and Stephanie A.E. Jolivette
2011 Big Sites, Small Sites, and Coastal Settlement Patterns in the San Juan Islands,Washington,
USA. The Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology 6:287-313.
Taylor,Herbert C., Jr.
1953 Anthropological Investigation of the Medicine Creek Tribes Relative to Tribal Identity and
Aboriginal Possession of Lands. In Coast Salish and Western Washington Indians Volume 2,
pp. 401-474. Garland.
1984 Mollusks, Western Washington Indians, and the Steven's Treaties of 1854-1856. George
Banta,Menasha.
The Arlington Times
1987 "Rearing ponds to double summer chinook production."26 August. Arlington,Washington.
1988 "Stilly Tribes fisheries manager hangs up pole." 16 November. Arlington,Washington.
Thorson,Robert M.
1980 Ice-sheet Glaciation of the Puget Lowland,Washington,During the Vashon Stade (late
Pleistocene). Quaternary Research 13:303-312.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 68
1989 Glacio-isostatic Response of the Puget Sound Area,Washington. Geological Society of
America Bulletin 101:1163-1174.
Tollefson,Kenneth D.
1989 Political Organization of the Duwamish. Ethnology 28:135-50.
1992 The Political Survival of Landless Puget Sound Indians.American Indian Quarterly 16:
213-35.
Tollefson,Kenneth,Martin Abbott, and Eugene Wiggins
1996 Tribal Estates: A Comparative and Case Study. Ethnology 35:321-38.
Turner,Nancy J.
1995 Food Plants of Coastal First Peoples. Royal British Columbia Museum Handbook.
Victoria,British Columbia.
Tweddell, Collin Ellidge
1974 [1953] A Historical and Ethnological Study of the Snohomish Indian People: A Report
Covering Their Aboriginal and Continued Existence and Their Effective Occupation of a
Definable Territory. In Coast Salish and Western Washington Indians, Volume 2, edited by
David Agee Horr,pp. 475-694. Garland.
United States of America
1859 Treaty between the United States and the Dwamish, Suquamish,and other allied and
subordinate Tribes of Indians in Washington Territory. Concluded at Point Elliott,Washington
Territory,January 22, 1855,ratified by the Senate,March 8, 1859. Proclaimed by the President
of the United States,April 11, 1859. United States Statutes at Large, Treaties, and
Proclamations of the United States ofAmerica XII:927.
United States Court of Claims
1933 The Duwamish, Lummi, Whidbey Island, Skagit, upper Skagit, Swinomish, Kikiallus,
Snohomish, Snoqualmie, Stillaguamish, Suquamish, Samish, Puyallup, Squaxin, Skokomish,
upper Chehalis,Muckleshoot, Nooksack, Chinook and San Juan Islands tribes of Indians,
claimants, vs. the United States ofAmerica, defendant.No. F-275.Argus Press, Seattle.
Waterman, T.T.
1920 Puget Sound Geography. Microform of manuscript on file, Suzzallo Library,Microfilm
A3435.University of Washington, Seattle.
Waterman, T.T.,Hilbert,Vi,J.Miller, and Zalmai Zahir(editors)
2001 Puget Sound Geography. Original manuscript from T.T.Waterman[1921]; edited with
additional material from Vi Hilbert,Jay Miller,and Zalmai Zahir. Lushootseed Press,Federal
Way.
Whitfield,William
1926 History of Snohomish County, Vol. L Pioneer Historical, Chicago.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 69
9.0 APPENDICES
Appendix 1:Shovel Probe Descriptions, Particle Size Classes and Matrix
Descriptions
Particle Size Classes
Scale Clay Silt Sand Gravel Pebble Cobble Boulder
in <.00015 .00015—.0025 .0025—.08 .08-1 1-4 4-10 >10
mm <.004 .004—.062 .062-2 2-25.4 25.4-102 102-254 >254
Matrix Descriptions
Matrix 1: lOYR 3/2 very dark grayish brown to lOYR 4/2 dark grayish brown; 80%-85%
sandy silt,5%-10%subangular to rounded gravels, 5%-10%subangular to rounded
to pebbles, 01/o-5% organics [decomposing woody debris], <1% subrounded to
subangular cobbles; moderate compaction; damp to wet; gradual to clear interface.
Disturbed local sediment.
Matrix 2: 2.5Y 5/2 grayish brown with oxidation streaks (hardpan), 10YR 2/2 dark grayish
brown to 3/6 dark yellowish brown; 75%-100% sandy silt, 0-10% subangular to
subrounded gravels, 0-10% subangular to subrounded pebbles, 0-5% subrounded
to subangular cobbles; moderate to dense compaction; dry to saturated; gradual to
clear color transition.Intact glacial till.
Shovel Probe Descriptions
SP Depth Dia Matrix Description Result
(cm) (cm) (Depths in cm)
1 78 48 0-36: M1, gradual interface. Negative
36-78: M2, grayish brown.
2 84 41 0-47: Ml, clear interface. Negative
47-84: M2, clear color transition to 5/2 grayish brown at 67.
67-84: M2 with 10%coarse sand and 30%silt,undeveloped,
moderate to dense compaction.
3 68 55 0-43: M1, orangish brown with decomposing organics, 80% Negative
sandy silt,less than 5%organics, 15% subangular to rounded
pebbles and gravels.
43-68: M2, 85%sandy silt,brownish gray.
4 70 49 0-35: Ml, clear interface Negative
35-64: Decomposing tree root, 10YR 3/1 20% silt, 10%
medium sand, 70%organics, clear interface.
64-70: M2, clear interface,water table at 66.
5 29 45 0-29: Ml,very dark grayish brown, sandy silt 80%,organics Negative
15%, 5%rounded pebbles.
6 60 60 0-9: M1 clear interface Negative
9-60: M2, clear color transition at 51 to
li hter color, clear interface,water table at 51.
7 63 55 0-44: M1 grayish brown sandy silt 80%, 5%organics, 15% Negative
subrounded to subangular pebbles and gravels,gradual
transition.
44-63: M2 brownish gray 85% sandy silt, 15% subrounded
to suban ular pebbles and gravels.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 70
SP Depth Dia Matrix Description Result
(cm) (cm) (Depths in cm)
8a 72 50 0-47: M1, clear interface at 35 to dark organic stained Negative
layer on north and west sides, clear interface.
47-67: M2, organic staining from above extends to 67 on
north and west sides,water table at 54
Auger 10 cm diameter:
67-72: M2.
9 71 53 0-14: M1,very dark grayish brown. Negative
14-71: M2, grayish brown.
10 100 51 0-52: M1, gradual color transition from very dark grayish Negative
brown to dark grayish brown at 22.
52-100: M2.
11 75 46 0-54: M1, clear transition. Negative
54-75: M2. Only east wall starts as normal M2 for about 10
cm,the rest is all very dark brown from a large decomposing
root.
12 69 45 0-55: M1, gradual color transition from very dark grayish Negative
brown to dark grayish brown at 24.
55-69: M2.
13 74 45 0-55: M1, clear transition, large root in east wall(dug Negative
around it).
55-74: M2,very dense compaction, groundwater seeping in
at interface, sediment dry until groundwater leaks in.
14 80 50 0-45: M1,natural carbon(root burn)throughout,clear Negative
transition.
45-80: M2, starts out moderate compaction and brown,
gradual transition into the gray hardpan at about 69,very
dense.
15 74 54 0-46: M1,more organics(a couple of small decomposing Negative
organics) and higher density of pebbles and cobbles.
46-74: M2, sandy, gravel—less sand inclusion in the
southwest wall
16 60 46 0-47: M1,wet,clear transition. Negative
47-60: M2,very dense, groundwater filling in.
17 60 43 0-60: M1 grayish brown silty sand 80-85%, 0-5%organics, Negative
15% subrounded to subangular pebbles and gravels. M2 may
have been at base but SP filled with groundwater.
18 90 43 0-70: M1,brown sandy silt 80%, 15% subangular to Negative
rounded pebbles and gravels, 5%organics.
70-90: M2 gray sandy silt 85%, 15% subangular to rounded
ebbles and gravels.
19 85 45 0-32: M1, damp, gradual transition. Negative
32-80: M2. Begins moderate compaction and yellowish
brown, at 72 abrupt transition to gray hardpan,very dense.
20 60 48 0-60: M2 dark yellowish brown,moderate compaction, Negative
many roots. Groundwater at base.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 71
SP Depth Dia Matrix Description Result
(cm) (cm) (Depths in cm)
21 81 45 0-50: M1, colorless glass fragments and 2 wire nails Negative
throughout, discontinuous and wavy transition.
50-81: M2,begins moderate compaction and yellowish
brown. Compaction increases with depth. Gradual transition
into gray hard an at about 70,very dense.
22a 108 52 0-32: M1, dry to damp,dark brown, few gravels. Gradual Negative
interface.
32-94: M2 dark yellowish brown,25% subrounded to
rounded gravels,<5% subrounded to round pebbles, 70%
silt,<1% organic. Clear transition to hardpan.
80-94: M2, dense gray hardpan, 5% subrounded to round
gravels.
Auger 10 cm diameter:
94-108: M2, dense hardpan grayish brown, 10% subrounded
to round avels, 1%round pebbles,45% silt,40%fine sand.
23 66 49 0-30: M1. In the north and east walls there is a very large, Negative
curved root taking up about half the SP.
30-66: M2. Below the root is associated black staining. The
rest of the SP is yellowish brown; about 50 it gradually
transitions to gray but is not hardpan. 2 perpendicular
cobbles making the diameter extra narrow,shovel doesn't fit.
24 60 48 0-40: M1, clear transition,wet. Negative
40-60: M2,yellowish brown, saturated.
25a 120 47 0-65: M1,northwest wall interface there was some Negative
decomposing wood and associated staining,clear transition.
65-90: M2,moderately dense compaction to 90, SP filling
with water
Auger 10 cm diameter:
90-120: M2, dense compaction and saturated.
26 70 50 0-27: M1, dry to damp,moderate compaction, 15% large Negative
subrounded to round pebbles,25% subrounded to round
gravels, 60%silt,dark brown.
27-70: M2, dry to damp,moderate compaction. Beginning
at 58 dense hardpan.
27a 75 47 0-55: M1, gradual color transition from 10YR 3/2 to IOYR Negative
4/2 at—17
55-63: M2, saturated.
Auger 10 cm diameter:
63-75: M2,heavily saturated from groundwater.
28 58 50 0-28: M1 dark brown, 30%organic, 65% silt, 5% Negative
subrounded to round gravels,damp to wet.
28-58: M2, lighter orange to brown,wet to saturated, 10%
organics,<1% subrounded to rounded cobble,<5%
subrounded—rounded pebbles, 25% subrounded to rounded
gravels, 70%silt. Root burn at 39 and 46 in northwest wall,
43 in northeast wall, 39 in southeast wall smaller inclusion).
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 72
SP Depth Dia Matrix Description Result
(cm) (cm) (Depths in cm)
29 90 48 0-37: M1, clear interface. Negative
37-70: M2, clear transition at 58 to
M2 with li hter color,dense compaction.
30 79 47 0-27: M1, clear transition. Negative
27-79: M2,begins yellowish brown and moderate
compaction. Compaction increases with depth,gray hardpan
at 78.
31 50 50 0-48: M1, gradual color transition at—10. Negative
48-50: M2.
32 31 45 0-31: M1,high number of organics and roots, 10YR 2/3. Negative
33 90 48 0-69: M1 very dark brown, 55%organics(grass,wood), Negative
10% subrounded to rounded gravels, 5%subrounded to
round pebbles, 30% silt,damp to wet, scattered carbon
inclusions from decay.
69-78: M2,wet,grayish yellowish brown, 15%organic
materials, 20% subrounded to round gravels, 65% silt, loose
to mod. At 78, gray,wet to saturated.
34 66 48 0-30: M1, damp to wet,gradual transition. Negative
30-66: M2,yellowish brown,moderate compaction. Two
large cobbles in east and west walls (one maybe boulder)
making diameter narrow, also filling with water.
35 64 45 0-51: M1, gradual color transition at—23. Negative
51-64: M2, dense compaction.
36 85 47 0-47: M1, 3 metal fragments,4 nails, 1 colorless glass Negative
fragment, 1 amber glass fragment.
47-85: M2.
37 95 48 0-85: M1. Negative
85-95: M2.
38 30 40 0-30: M1, landscaping fabric and imported, subrounded fill. Negative
39 100 50 0-97: M1. Negative
97-100: M2.
40 81 48 0-15: M1,40% organic materials,moderate. Gradual Negative
interface.
15-81: M2, dry,moderate, 1% subrounded cobble, 5%
angular to round pebbles, 15% subangular to round gravels,
60% silt,20% sand. Hardpan at 72,very dense compaction,
41 67 50 0-30: M1, decomposing wood and staining in east wall at Negative
interface,clear transition.
30-67: M2,wet,groundwater leaking in,begins yellowish
brown, about 59 transitions to gray and dense compaction.
42 47 47 0-31: M1,moderate, dry. Negative
31-47: M2 moderate to dense compaction, dry, less rocks.
43 100 45 0-90: M1. Negative
90-100: M2.
44 100 50 0-90: Ml. Negative
90-100: M2.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 73
SP Depth Dia Matrix Description Result
(cm) (cm) (Depths in cm)
45 35 44 0-35: M1, 80% sandy silt, 10%gravels, 5% subrounded and Negative
sub-angularpebbles, 5%cobbles.
46a 122 55 0-27: M1,looser compaction. Negative
27-100: M2,gradual color transition from reddish yellow-
brown to light-medium gray with oxidation at—70. Dense
compaction starting at—70.
Auger 10 cm diameter:
0-122: M2,light-medium gray with oxidation, dense
compaction,dry.
47 60 58 0-12: M1, dry, dense compaction, 80% sandy silt, 15% Negative
subrounded and subangular pebbles, 5% gravels,<1%
rootlets.
12-60: M2, dense compaction, 50%silty sand,25% sub-
angular and subrounded pebbles,20%gravels, 5%cobbles.
Gradual color transition from yellowish light brown to
brownish gray at—25. Very dense compaction starting at
—25.
48 23 62 0-23: M1,moderate compaction,then dense compaction, Negative
pink gum wad,brick fragment,white plastic fragment and
colorless glass fragment from 0 to 10. Green glass fragment,
amber glass fragment,nail, and plastic object from 10 to 20,
redplastic fragment between 15 and 20.
49 100 56 0-26: Ml. Negative
26-100: M2.
50 91 50 0-12: M1, clear interface, dry,moderate compaction, 90% Negative
yellowish brown sandy silt.
12-91: M2, 12-60 was a yellow brown,moderate
compaction, 80%sandy silt, 10% subrounded and
subangular pebbles, 10% subrounded cobbles. 60-91,
yellowish medium gray,dense compaction,75%silty sand,
15%gravels, 10%pebbles.
51 86 52 0-75: M1, color transition at—15,rootlets and medium sized Negative
roots throughout.
75-86: M2, dense compaction.
52 45 50 0-45: M1, saturated. Negative
53a 104 46 0-19: M1, clear transition. Negative
19-90: M2,begins yellowish brown and moderate to 76,
abrupt change to gray hardpan.
Auger 10 cm diameter:
90-104: M2,gray hardpan.
54 100 47 0-20: Ml, clear transition. Negative
20-100: M2,all moderate compaction.Began yellowish
brown, at 70 abrupt color change to gray.
55 100 45 0-20: Ml, clear transition. Negative
20-100: M2,all yellowish brown and moderate compaction.
56 80 45 0-30: M1, clear transition. Negative
30-80: M2, all dark brown and moderate compaction.
Boulder taking up half of base.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 74
SP Depth Dia Matrix Description Result
(cm) (cm) (Depths in cm)
57 100 45 0-25: Ml, gradual transition. Negative
25-100: M2,all yellowish brown and moderate compaction.
58 100 50 0-30: M1,gradual transition, one ferrous metal nail and Negative
colorless glass fragment.
30-100: M2,all yellowish brown and moderate compaction.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 75
Appendix 2:Photograph Log
Number View Description
24.06.27GAB001 E SP 9 with scale,P200
24.06.27GAB002 E SP 9 without scale
24.06.27GAB003 NNW SP 9 overview
24.06.27GAB004 NNE SP 10 with scale,P200
24.06.27GAB005 NNE SP 10 without scale
24.06.27GAB006 NW SP 10 overview with ERCI at SPs 3 and 11
24.06.27GAB007 NE SP 12 with scale,P200
24.06.27GAB008 NE SP 12 without scale
24.06.27GAB009 NW SP 12 overview with ERCI at SP 13
24.06.27GAB010 SSE SP 15 with scale,P200
24.06.27GAB011 SSE SP 15 without scale
24.06.27GAB012 NW SP 15 overview with ERCI at SP 8
24.06.27GAB013 NW SP 27 with scale,P100
24.06.27GAB014 NW SP 27 without scale
24.06.27GAB015 NW SP 27 overview
24.06.27GAB016 NE SP 29 with scale,P 100
24.06.27GAB017 NE SP 29 without scale
24.06.27GAB018 SW SP 29 overview
24.06.27REP001 SE SP 2 with scale
24.06.27REP002 SE SP 2 without scale
24.06.27REP003 SE SP 2 overview
24.06.27REP004 SE SP 4 with scale
24.06.27REP005 SE SP 4 without scale
24.06.27REP006 S SP 4 overview
24.06.27REP007 SE SP 6 with scale
24.06.27REP008 SE SP 6 without scale
24.06.27REP009 S SP 6 overview
24.06.27REP010 P Water table in SP 8 before augering
24.06.27REP011 NW SP 6 with scale,northwest side
24.06.27REP012 NW SP 6 with scale,northwest side, close up of organic layer
24.06.27REP013 NW SP 6 without scale,northwest side
24.06.27REP014 SE SP 6 with scale, southeast side
24.06.27REP015 SE SP 6 without scale, southeast side
24.06.27REP016 W SP 6 overview with ditch
24.06.27ILP001 NE SP 1 with scale
24.06.27ILP002 NE SP 1 without scale
24.06.27ILP003 NE SP 1 overview with ERCI
24.06.27ILP004 N SP 1 overview with ERCI
24.06.27ILP005 S SP 3 with scale
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 76
Number View Description
24.06.27ILP006 S SP 3 without scale
24.06.27ILP007 N SP 3 overview with ERCI
24.06.27ILP008 N SP 5 with scale
24.06.27ILP009 N SP 5 without scale
24.06.27ILP010 WNW SP 5 overview
24.06.27ILP011 NNE SP 7 with scale
24.06.27ILP012 NNE SP 7 without scale
24.06.27ILP013 E SP 7 overview with ERCI
24.06.27ILP014 W SP 17 with scale
24.06.27ILP015 W SP 17 without scale
24.06.27ILP016 W SP 17 overview
24.06.27ILP017 E SP 17 overview
24.06.27ILP018 P Wood stakes found in shallow bank
24.06.27ILP019 P Wood stakes found in shallow bank
24.06.27ILP020 E Wood stakes found in shallow bank,overview
24.06.27ILP021 N SP 18 with scale
24.06.27ILP022 N SP 18 without scale
24.06.27ILP023 NE SP 18 overview
24.06.27AAY001 N P2200 overview
24.06.27AAY002 NE P2200 overview
24.06.27AAY003 E P2200 overview, east end of parcel
24.06.27AAY004 SW P2200 overview, east end of parcel
24.06.27AAY005 S Path leading into P600
24.06.27AAY006 N Elderberry,P600
24.06.27AAY007 S Standing water/muck,P600
24.06.27AAY008 E Recently bushwacked path,P600
24.06.27AAY009 N Holly,P600
24.06.27AAY010 N P600,north of treed area
24.06.27AAY011 E P600, foundation
24.06.27AAY012 N P600, foundation
24.06.27AAY013 NE P600, foundation and barn for reference
24.06.27AAY014 W P600, foundation and barn for reference
24.06.27AAY015 S P600, foundation and barn for reference
24.06.27AAY016 P Bricks on foundation
24.06.27AAY017 SE Wood on foundation
24.06.27AAY018 W Cinderblocks on foundation
24.06.27AAY019 S P 100100 overview
24.06.27AAY020 SW Parcel 100100 garage
24.06.27AAY021 W [1914 house,P 100100] front porch
24.06.27AAY022 S [1914 house,P100100],west side
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 77
Number View Description
24.06.27AAY023 SW [1914 house,P100100], east side covered in vegetation
24.06.27AAY024 S [1914 house,P100100] front porch
24.06.27AAY025 S [1914 house,P 100100] front porch
24.06.27AAY026 SE [1914 house,P100100] side door/porch
24.06.27AAY027 N [1914 house,P 100100] side porch roof
24.06.27AAY028 N [1914 house,P100100] side porch
24.06.27AAY029 E [1914 house,P100100] patio, side of house
24.06.27AAY030 NE [1914 house,P100100] side of house,collapsed
24.06.27AAY031 N [1914 house,P100100] side of house, collapsed
24.06.27AAY032 N SP 11 with scale
24.06.27AAY033 N SP 11 without scale
24.06.27AAY034 NW SP 11 overview with ERCI in background
24.06.27AAY035 S SP 13 with scale
24.06.27AAY036 S SP 13 without scale
24.06.27AAY037 S SP 13 overview
24.06.27AAY038 N SP 14 with scale
24.06.27AAY039 N SP 14 without scale
24.06.27AAY040 N SP 14 overview with ERCI at SPs 15 and 8
24.06.27AAY041 W Recent surface burn
24.06.27AAY042 N Ditch
24.06.27AAY043 W Looking down ditch
24.06.27AAY044 P Ditch end
24.06.27AAY045 S Ditch from the end
24.06.27AAY046 N Ditch end
24.06.27AAY047 ENE Utilities
24.06.27AAY048 SE P100100 overview
24.06.27AAY049 E Carport
24.06.27AAY050 N Carport, chimney visible
24.06.27AAY051 N P 100100 overview, east of garage
24.06.27AAY052 N SP 16 with scale
24.06.27AAY053 N SP 16 without scale
24.06.27AAY054 N SP 16 overview
24.06.27AAY055 E SP 19 with scale
24.06.27AAY056 E SP 19 without scale
24.06.27AAY057 S SP 19 overview
24.06.28GABOOI N SP 30 with scale
24.06.28GAB002 N SP 31 without scale
24.06.28GAB003 N SP 31 overview, facing path taken there
24.06.28GAB004 P Blue and colorless plastic Dasani wrapper,found on surface near SP 32
24.06.28GAB005 E SP 32 with scale
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 78
Number View Description
24.06.28GAB006 E SP 32 without scale
24.06.28GAB007 NE SP 32 overview with notched stump in background
24.06.28GAB008 NE SP 51 with scale
24.06.28GAB009 NE SP 51 without scale
24.06.28GAB010 NNE SP 51 overview
24.06.28GAB011 SW SP 35 with scale
24.06.28GAB012 SW SP 35 without scale
24.06.28GAB013 NNW SP 35 overview
24.06.28GAB014 NE SP 38 with scale
24.06.28GAB015 NE SP 38 without scale
24.06.28GAB016 NNW SP 38 overview with ERCI at SP 39
24.06.28FLK001 E ERCI pedestrian survey through dense ferns
24.06.28FLK002 E ERCI pedestrian survey through dense ferns
24.06.28FLK003 W Dense vegetation
24.06.28FLK004 S Dense vegetation
24.06.28FLK005 S Large stump with ERCI
24.06.28FLK006 S Large stump with ERCI
24.06.28FLK007 S Wetland area
24.06.28FLK008 P Complete Gatorade glass bottle with tin foil
24.06.28FLK009 P Complete Gatorade glass bottle with tin foil
24.06.28FLK010 P Complete Gatorade glass bottle with tin foil
24.06.28FLK011 P Complete Gatorade glass bottle with tin foil,base
24.06.28FLK012 W Glass bottle location(near shovel)
24.06.28FLK013 S SP 20 overview
24.06.28FLK014 N SP 20 with scale
24.06.28FLK015 N SP 20 without scale
24.06.28FLK016 W SP 20 overview
24.06.28FLK017 W Vegetation and stump
24.06.28FLK018 N Old growth with notches
24.06.28FLK019 N Old growth with notches
24.06.28FLK020 W Old growth with notches
24.06.28FLK021 SW Old growth with notches
24.06.28FLK022 NNE ERCI at SP 32 by old growth
24.06.28FLK023 NE Tree with tire surrounding base
24.06.28FLK024 W SP 52 with scale
24.06.28FLK025 W SP 52 without scale
24.06.28FLK026 P Boreal bramble
24.06.28FLK027 N SP 52 overview
24.06.28FLK028 E SP 36 with scale
24.06.28FLK029 E SP 36 without scale
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 79
Number View Description
24.06.28FLK030 S SP 36 overview
24.06.28FLK031 P SP 36 refuse
24.06.28FLK032 S SP 37 with scale
24.06.28FLK033 S SP 37 without scale
24.06.28FLK034 W SP 37 overview
24.06.28FLK035 S SP 39 with scale
24.06.28FLK036 S SP 39 without scale
24.06.28FLK037 NE SP 39 overview
24.06.28FLK038 S SP 44 with scale
24.06.28FLK039 S SP 44 without scale
24.06.28FLK040 E SP 44 overview
24.06.28FLK041 E SP 43 with scale
24.06.28FLK042 E SP 43 without scale
24.06.28FLK043 NE SP 43 overview
24.06.28IRC001 NW Overview from SP 28
24.06.28IRC002 S Overview from SP 28
24.06.28IRC003 E Overview from SP 28,grass
24.06.28IRC004 NW Rose bush
24.06.28IRC005 N Rose bush
24.06.28IRC006 N Rose bush, close up with flower
24.06.28IRC007 N SP 28 with scale
24.06.28IRC008 N SP 28 without scale
24.06.28IRC009 NW SP 28 overview
24.06.28IRC010 N Bush with seed pod to identify
24.06.28IRC011 NE Bushes to identify
24.06.28IRC012 N Berry bush to identify,possibly twinberry
24.06.28IRC013 SW Large anthill
24.06.28IRC014 N Project area overview
24.06.28IRC015 P Small flowers and grasses
24.06.28IRC016 P Deer tracks
24.06.28IRC017 NW Scotch broom brushes
24.06.28IRC018 NW Scotch broom brushes
24.06.28IRC019 W Red elderberry
24.06.28IRCO20 W Red elderberry
24.06.28IRCO21 N Bushes-potentially blackberries
24.06.28IRCO22 SE Project area overview
24.06.28IRCO23 S Grass or rush to identify
24.06.28IRCO24 S Grass or rush to identify
24.06.28IRCO25 SSE Project area overview
24.06.28IRCO26 SSE Willow grove/stand
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 80
Number View Description
24.06.28IRCO27 S Willow close up
24.06.28IRCO28 P ERCI holding M3
24.06.28IRCO29 NW SP 22a with scale
24.06.28IRC030 NW SP 22a without scale
24.06.28IRC031 SSE SP 22a overview
24.06.28IRC032 NNE SP 22a overview
24.06.28IRC033 E Trees to identify
24.06.28IRC034 S SP 26 with scale
24.06.28IRC035 E SP 26 without scale
24.06.28IRC036 N SP 26 overview
24.06.28IRC037 N Deer tracks at SP 33
24.06.28IRC038 N Saturated M1 mixed with M2 in screen
24.06.28IRC039 NNE SP 33 with scale
24.06.28IRC040 NNE SP 33 without scale
24.06.28IRC041 N SP 33 overview
24.06.28IRC042 NE SP 40 with scale
24.06.28IRC043 NE SP 40 without scale
24.06.28IRC044 S SP 40 overview
24.06.28IRC045 N Overview of field vegetation
24.06.28IRC046 WNW Grass to identify
24.06.28IRC047 ENE SP 42 with scale
24.06.28IRC048 ENE SP 42 without scale
24.06.28IRC049 E SP 42 overview
24.06.28AAY001 N P 100100 driveway
24.06.28AAY002 NE P100100 overview
24.06.28AAY003 SE P100100 overview
24.06.28AAY004 S P 100100 overview
24.06.28AAY005 SW P100100, 1914 house covered in vegetation
24.06.28AAY006 W P 100100 overview
24.06.28AAY007 E P100100 overview
24.06.28AAY008 SE P100100 overview
24.06.28AAY009 SW P100100 overview,backyard
24.06.28AAY010 W P100100 overview
24.06.28AAY011 NW P 100100 overview
24.06.28AAY012 N P2300 driveway
24.06.28AAY013 S P2300 yard
24.06.28AAY014 W P2300 house
24.06.28AAY015 E P2300, shed and trailers
24.06.28AAY016 N P2300 backyard
24.06.28AAY017 S P2300 backyard
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 81
Number View Description
24.06.28AAY018 SE P2300 backyard and house
24.06.28AAY019 SSE Recent surface fire
24.06.28AAY020 E P2300 backyard
24.06.28AAY021 S SP 30 with scale
24.06.28AAY022 S SP 30 without scale
24.06.28AAY023 S SP 30 overview
24.06.28AAY024 W SP 21 with scale
24.06.28AAY025 W SP 21 without scale
24.06.28AAY026 S SP 21 with scale and foundation
24.06.28AAY027 S SP 21 with scale and foundation
24.06.28AAY028 S SP 21 overview,marked with shovel
24.06.28AAY029 P Wire nails, 6.5cm long, 6mm diameter heads, SP 21 M1
24.06.28AAY030 P SP 21 colorless glass fragments,M1
24.06.28AAY031 S SP 23 with scale
24.06.28AAY032 W SP 23 with scale
24.06.28AAY033 S SP 23 without scale
24.06.28AAY034 E SP 23 overview
24.06.28AAY035 S P600 overview,ERCI at SP 22
24.06.28AAY036 W NW corner,parcel 600
24.06.28AAY037 SE P600 house,two sheds, and barn
24.06.28AAY038 E P600 yard
24.06.28AAY039 W SP 24 with scale
24.06.28AAY040 W SP 24 without scale
24.06.28AAY041 W SP 24 overview
24.06.28AAY042 S East boundary, P600
24.06.28AAY043 W North boundary, P600
24.06.28AAY044 SW P600 overview,yard and barn
24.06.28AAY045 W P600 overview,yard and barn
24.06.28AAY046 W P2300 field overview
24.06.28AAY047 NW P2300 field overview
24.06.28AAY048 N P2300 overview,north parcel boundary
24.06.28AAY049 SE P2300 overview, looking upslope from northwest parcel corner
24.06.28AAY050 S P2300 overview,west parcel boundary
24.06.28AAY051 SSE Deteriorating wood shed in field
24.06.28AAY052 W Deteriorating wood shed in field
24.06.28AAY053 N SP 35 with scale
24.06.28AAY054 N SP 34 without scale
24.06.28AAY055 N SP 34 overview
24.06.28AAY056 W SP 25a with scale
24.06.28AAY057 NW SP 25a overview
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 82
Number View Description
24.06.28AAY058 W SP 25a without scale
24.06.28AAY059 E SP 41 with scale
24.06.28AAY060 E SP 41 without scale
24.06.28AAY061 N SP 41 overview,W 152nd St
24.06.28AAY062 W P200 overview
24.06.28AAY063 SW P200 overview
24.06.28AAY064 W P200 overview
24.06.28AAY065 SW P200 overview
24.06.28AAY066 W P200 overview
24.07.17AAY001 N End of black plastic pipe in ditch
24.07.17AAY002 W End of black pipe in ditch location
24.07.17AAY003 W End of black pipe in ditch location
24.07.17AAY004 W Front of house P100200
24.07.17AAY005 S P100200 barn
24.07.17AAY006 N P 100200 modern pit
24.07.17AAY007 N P100200 firepit
24.07.17AAY008 N P100200 overview
24.07.17AAY009 E P100200 disturbance in field
24.07.17AAY010 E Looking upslope in P 100200
24.07.17AAY011 NE Looking upslope in P 100200
24.07.17AAY012 W P100200 field overview
24.07.17AAY013 NW P100200 field overview
24.07.17AAY014 N P100200 field overview
24.07.17AAY015 NW Deteriorating structure in field
24.07.17AAY016 SW Deteriorating structure in field
24.07.17AAY017 W P100200 driveway
24.07.17AAY018 W Septic
24.07.17AAY019 SE P100200,ERCI at SP48
24.07.17AAY020 SW Deer in field
24.07.17AAY021 E SP53a with scale
24.07.17AAY022 E SP53a without scale
24.07.17AAY023 S SP53a overview towards 172nd St NE
24.07.17AAY024 SW Decommissioned street sweeping spool(for animals)
24.07.17AAY025 E SP 54 with scale
24.07.17AAY026 E SP 54 without scale
24.07.17AAY027 E SP 54 overview
24.07.17AAY028 E SP 55 with scale
24.07.17AAY029 E SP 55 without scale
24.07.17AAY030 NW SP 55 without scale
24.07.17AAY031 N SP 55 overview
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 83
Number View Description
24.07.17AAY032 NW SP 56 with scale,trowel marking boulder
24.07.17AAY033 NW SP 56 without scale,trowel marking boulder
24.07.17AAY034 W SP 56 overview
24.07.17AAY035 NE SP 57 with scale
24.07.17AAY036 NE SP 57 without scale
24.07.17AAY037 N SP 57 overview
24.07.17GAB001 E SP 45 with scale
24.07.17GAB002 E SP 45 without scale
24.07.17GAB003 SE SP 45 overview
24.07.17GAB004 W SP 46a before auger with scale
24.07.17GAB005 W SP 46a with scale
24.07.17GAB006 W SP 46a without scale
24.07.17GAB007 P SP 46a without scale auger hole
24.07.17GAB008 SE SP 46 overview with barn
24.07.17GAB009 NW SP 47 with scale
24.07.17GAB010 NW SP 47 without scale
24.07.17GAB011 NW SP 47 overview with barn
24.07.17GAB012 NW SP 50 with scale
24.07.17GAB013 NW SP 50 without scale
24.07.17GAB014 SE SP 50 overview
24.07.17GAB015 NE SP 58 with scale
24.07.17GAB016 NE SP 58 without scale
24.07.17GAB017 NE SP 58 overview facing uphill towards 172nd St NE
24.07.17GAB018 SE SP 58 overview facing uphill towards 172nd St NE,decomposing organics
24.07.17GAB019 P SP 58 overview facing uphill towards 172nd St NE,decomposing organics,
refuse M1, corroded nail/screw
24.07.17GAB020 W SP 58 overview facing uphill towards 172nd St NE, decomposing organics
24.07.17REP001 NW SP 48 with scale
24.07.17REP002 NW SP 48 without scale
24.07.17REP003 W SP 48 overview with house in background
24.07.17REP004 P Pink gum wad with scale from SP 48
24.07.17REP005 P Pink gum wad with scale from SP 48 other side
24.07.17REP006 P Brick fragment with scale from SP 48
24.07.17REP007 P Brick fragment with scale from SP 48
24.07.17REP008 P Nail with scale from SP 48
24.07.17REP009 P Nail with scale from SP 48 other side
24.07.17REP010 P White plastic fragment with scale from SP 48
24.07.17REP011 P White plastic fragment with scale from SP 48 other side
24.07.17REP012 P Colorless glass fragment with scale from SP 48
24.07.17REP013 P Colorless glass fragment with scale from SP 48 other side
24.07.17REP014 P Plastic object with scale from SP 48
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 84
Number View Description
24.07.17REP015 P Plastic object with scale from SP 48 other side
24.07.17REP016 P Amber glass fragment with scale from SP 48
24.07.17REP017 P Amber glass fragment with scale from SP 48 other side
24.07.17REP018 P Green glass fragment with scale from SP 48
24.07.17REP019 P Green glass fragment with scale from SP 48 other side
24.07.17REP020 P Red plastic fragment with scale from SP 48
24.07.17REP021 P Red plastic fragment with scale from SP 48 other side
24.07.17REP022 S SP 49 with scale
24.07.17REP023 S SP 49 without scale
24.07.17REP024 N SP 49 overview
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 85
Appendix 3: Unanticipated Discovery Protocol
In the event that any ground-disturbing activities or other project activities related to this development
or any future development uncover protected cultural material(see below),the following actions should
be taken:
1. If the cultural material is a historic or precontact object(glass bottle,tin can, stone,bone,horn
or antler tool); a historic or precontact feature(hearth,building foundation,privy),then the on-
site supervisor should avoid the object, secure the location and relocate work activities to a
different part of the Project area. The Project manager should then call a professional
archaeologist to evaluate the discovery.
2. If ground disturbing activities encounter human skeletal remains during the course of
construction, then all activity will cease that may cause further disturbance to those remains.
The area of the find will be secured and protected from further disturbance. The finding of
human skeletal remains will be reported to the county medical examiner/coroner and local law
enforcement in the most expeditious manner possible.The remains will not be touched,moved,
or further disturbed. The county medical examiner/coroner will assume jurisdiction over the
human skeletal remains and make a determination of whether those remains are forensic or
non-forensic.If the county medical examiner/coroner determines the remains are non-forensic,
then they will report that finding to the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
(DAHP) who will then take jurisdiction over the remains. The DAHP will notify any
appropriate cemeteries and all affected tribes of the find. The State Physical Anthropologist
will make a determination of whether the remains are Indian or Non-Indian and report that
finding to any appropriate cemeteries and the affected tribes. The DAHP will then handle all
consultation with the affected parties as to the future preservation, excavation, and disposition
of the remains.
Cultural material that may be protected by law could include but is not limited to:
• Logging,mining,railroad, or agriculture equipment older than 50 years(Figure 55)
• Historic foundations(Figure 56)
• Historic bottles,ceramics, and soldered dot cans(Figure 57,Figure 58)
• Buried cobbles that may indicate a hearth feature(Figure 59)
• Non-natural sediment or stone deposits that may be related to activity areas of people
• Stone tools or stone flakes, projectile points (arrowheads), ground stone adzes or grinding
stones(abraders)(Figure 60—Figure 63)
• Bone,shell,horn,or antler tools that may include scrapers,cutting tools,wood working wedges
(Figure 64,Figure 65)
• Perennially damp areas may have preservation conditions that allow for remnants of wood and
other plant fibers; in these locations there may be remains including fragments of basketry,
weaving,wood tools, or carved pieces(Figure 66)
• Culturally modified trees(Figure 67)
• Human remains
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 86
a
lam,
a�
O
Figure 55: Example of railroad ties for UDP.
Il
Figure 56: Example of historic foundation for UDP.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 87
fN,
Ar
Figure 57: Example of historic glass artifacts for UDP.
IR
Figure 58: Example of historic solder dot can for UDP
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 88
Y -d"
Figure 59: Example of protected rock-lined hearth feature for UDP.
9�
Figure 60: Example of projectile point for UDP.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 89
w
Figure 61: Example of protected adze blade for UDP.
--7W. 77
removedFlakes
. .
Same retouch and use on the wedge
end and the rounded
Figure 62: Example of stone tool for UDP.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 90
Figure 63: Example of stone tool for UDP.
5 cm
Figure 64: Example of bone awl for UDP.
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 91
t
' 1
• 1
3
I
s
Figure 65: Example of worked bone and spines for UDP.
LO
/ !��' ■41 i ks i
■..
Figure 66: Example of cedar bark basketry for UDP.
ERCi Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 92
t A
J
A .
S � y
Figure 67: Example of planked tree for UDP.
CONTACT LIST
Name Affiliation Phone email
Rob Risinger MJS Investors 425-417-6004 robr@mjsinvestors.com
Polic Dept Arlington 360-403-3400
Medical Examiner Snohomish County 425-438-6200
Steven Moses and Snoqualmie Indian Tribe 425-292-0249 Steve@snoqualmietribe.us
Adam Osbekoff ext. 2010 adam@snoqualmietribe.us
Kerry Lyste Stillaguamish Tribe of 360.652.3687 KLyste@stillaguamish.com
Indians ext. 14
Richard Young and Tulalip Tribes 360-716-2652 ryoung@tulaliptribes-nsn.gov
Gene Enick
Stephanie Jolivette Local Government (360)628-2755 Stephanie.Jolivette@dahp.wa.gov
Archaeologist
Rob Whitlam State Archaeologist 360-890-2615 Rob.Whitlam@dahp.wa.gov
Guy Tasa State Physical 360-790-1633 Guy.tasa@dahp.wa.gov
Anthropologist
Kelly R. Bush ERCI archaeologist 360-661-0356 kelrbush@equinoxerci.com
ERCI—Archaeological Survey Report:8014,8118,8210,and 8326 172nd Street Northeast,Arlington,Washington 93